Jones v. Jones’s Empirical Analysis
2003
Citation profile
3 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 123 Wash. 2d 641 - State v. Hill · 54 Wash. 2d 570 - Thorndike v. Hesperian Orchards, Inc. · Bishop v. Miche · 96 Wash. 2d 183 - In Re the Marriage of Little · 97 Wash. 2d 454 - DEP'T OF TRANSPORTATION v. Seib
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.
“which the court may deem sufficient. RCW 11.28.250. But RCW 11.68.070 limits the reasons justifying the removal of a nonintervention personal representative to the reasons specified in RCW 11.28.250, i.e., waste, embezzlement, mismanagement, fraud, and neglect. The catch-all”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“to mention or name in a specific or explicit manner: tell or state precisely or in detail.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“in the court-supervised administration provisions of RCW 11.28.250. To”
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.