93 Ohio App. 315 - Segal v. Fleischer’s Empirical Analysis
1952
Citation profile
2 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently August 2009
2 district · 2 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The Common Pleas Court ‘blue penciled’ that part of the restriction reading ‘and/or in any city, town, borough, township or other place in the United States and Canada, in which the company is then engaged in rendering its service’, and granted injunctive relief to plaintiff confined to the city of Toledo. -x- * * * * * “No comment or reference to the actual ‘blue penciled’ effect given to the restriction appears in the Supreme Court opinion. We, therefore, do not know whether or not had the language of the restrictive covenant not been susceptible of ‘blue pencil-ling’ the court would have reached the same conclusion.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.