94 Ohio App. 3d 561 - Toth v. Toth’s Empirical Analysis
1994
Citation profile
11 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 54 Ohio App. 3d 166 - Newman v. Al Castrucci Ford Sales, Inc. · State ex rel. Fant v. Sykes · 74 Ohio App. 3d 707 - Passmore v. Greene County Board of Elections · 70 Ohio App. 3d 493 - Kemp, Schaeffer Rowe Co., L.P.A. v. Frecker · 74 Ohio App. 3d 798 - Spangler v. Redick
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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Every pleading, motion, or other document of a party represented by an attorney shall be signed by at least one attorney of record * * *. * * * The signature of an attorney or pro se party constitutes a certificate by the attorney or party that the attorney or party has read the document; that to the best of the attorney's or party's knowledge, information, and belief there is good ground to support it; and that it is not interposed for delay. If a document is not signed or is signed with intent to defeat the purpose of this rule, it may be stricken as sham and false and the action may proceed as though the document had not been served. For a willful violation of this rule, an attorney or pro se party, upon motion of a party or upon the court's own motion, may be subjected to appropriate action, including an award to the opposing party of expenses and reasonable attorney fees incurred in bringing any motion under this rule. Similar action may be taken if scandalous or indecent matter is inserted.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“is not warranted under existing law and cannot be supported by a good faith argument for an extension, modification, or reversal of existing law.”
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.