104 Wash. App. 75 - State v. Clausing’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

3 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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “It is not unlawful to deliver a legend drug if the legend drug either: 1) is dispensed by a licensed practitioner upon the order or prescription of a licensed physician or osteopathic physician; or 2) is delivered by a practitioner acting within the scope of his or her license. The State has the burden of proving beyond a reasonable doubt that the legend drugs in Counts I, II, and III were not dispensed by a licensed practitioner upon the order or prescription of a licensed physician and that they were not delivered by a practitioner acting within the scope of his or her license.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Clausing · State v. Clausing

2. “[T]he question should not elicit and it's not intended to elicit—and the answers should not be considered by you as a legal opinion—an opinion as to what the law is or what the law is that you would apply in this case. It's being offered as an opinion from this witness from the perspective of a pharmacist or an employee of the Board of Pharmacy.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Clausing

3. “`Dispense' means the interpretation of a prescription or order for a legend drug and, pursuant to that prescription or order, the proper selection, measuring, compounding, labeling, or packaging necessary to prepare that prescription or order for delivery.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Clausing