90 Ohio App. 3d 735 - State v. Rosenberger’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

4 state decisions

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “This statutory duty to report suspected sexual abuse, however, arises only if an individual listed in R.C. 2151.421 `is acting in his official or professional capacity.' The language in the statute is clear and unambiguous and establishes a condition precedent to the legal duty to report sexual abuse. Therefore, under Hensley , the ends of justice would not be served if the limitation period began to run when the responsible adult was not acting in his official or professional capacity because the responsible adult would not be under a statutory duty to report the suspected abuse.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Simms, Unpublished Decision (12-23-2005)

2. “as enumerated in R.C. 2151.421 . But the state argued that merely establishing that a responsible adult had acquired knowledge of sexual abuse is not enough to commence the limitation period. Instead, it argued that the limitation period only begins to run if the responsible adult acquired the requisite knowledge while acting in his or her official or professional capacity. The Ninth District agreed and stated: {¶ 24}”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Simms, Unpublished Decision (12-23-2005)