112 Wash. App. 102 - Bennett v. Computer Task Group, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
2002
Citation profile
2 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 121 Wash. 2d 715 - Kruse v. Hemp · 121 Wash. 2d 810 - Mains Farm Homeowners Ass'n v. Worthington · 120 Wash. 2d 246 - Washburn v. Beatt Equipment Co. · 95 Wash. 2d 94 - Wagner v. Wagner · 112 Wash. 2d 575 - Safeco Insurance Co. v. Barcom
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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Except as otherwise provided in this section, no employer shall employ any of his employees for a work week longer than forty hours unless such employee receives compensation for his employment in excess of the hours above specified at a rate not less than one and one-half times the regular rate at which he is employed.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Because that duty arose from tort law rather than from the written agreement itself, the six-year statute did not apply. [22] Here, the above cases support our conclusion that the six-year statute does not apply. Bennett's action is not one”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“not arise out of the contract under which the overpayment [was] made, nor from any implied liability contained in the contract itself, but ... ar[ose] from a duty imposed by law to repay an unjust and unmerited enrichment.”
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.