Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 115 Wash. 2d 434 - State v. Smith

115 Wash. 2d 434 - State v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis

1990

Citation profile

13
cited by 13 later decisions
2
states following
March 2021
most recently cited

13 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 13 later decisions — most recently March 2021

13 state decisions

801990200020102020decided

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.

Relationships

Applies 17 U.S.C. § 301 (§ 101 of the Copyright Act of 1976)

Relies on 90 Wash. 2d 443 - State v. Workman · Walker v. Illinois · 110 Wash. 2d 403 - State v. Kitchen · 105 Wash. 2d 692 - State v. Kwan Fai Mak · 87 Wash. 2d 374 - State v. Arndt

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

  1. “(a) To wrongfully obtain or exert unauthorized control over the property or services of another or the value thereof, with intent to deprive him of such property or services; or (b) By color or aid of deception to obtain control over the property or services of another or the value thereof, with intent to deprive him of such property or services;...”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “If under state law the act of reproduction, performance, distribution or display, no matter whether the law includes all such acts or only some, will in itself infringe the state created right, then such right is preempted. But if other elements are required, in addition to or instead of, the acts of reproduction, performance, distribution or display, in order to constitute a state created cause of action, then the right does not lie "within the general scope of copyright," and there is no preemption.”
    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.