Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 120 SW3D 778 - State v. Joos

State v. Joos’s Empirical Analysis

2003

Citation profile

2
cited by 2 later decisions
1
states following
February 2009
most recently cited

2 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on State v. Rousan · Cox v. Director of Revenue · State v. Mills · State v. Harris · State v. Larson

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.

  1. “Based on our reading of these definitions [of “operate”], we do not agree with Defendant that they equate to “hauling for hire.” Further, given the plain and ordinary meaning of the term as noted above, Defendant’s argument that, based on the absence of a definition of the term “operate” in the statute, he was not put on notice as to what activi ties would violate the statute or constitute “operate” fails.”
    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.