Vanderpool v. Rabideau’s Empirical Analysis
1976
Citation profile
3 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 63 Wash. 2d 23 - State Ex Rel. Craven v. City of Tacoma · State ex rel. Brown v. Board of Dental Examiners · 44 Wash. 2d 405 - Stoor v. City of Seattle · State Ex Rel. Farmer v. Austin · 66 Wash. 2d 199 - State Ex Rel. Lopez-Pacheco v. Jones
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.
“Arbitrary and capricious action means willful and unreasoning action, without consideration and in disregard of facts or circumstances. Where there is room for two opinions, action is not arbitrary or capricious when exercised honestly and upon due consideration, even though it may be believed that an erroneous conclusion has been reached.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“Courts will not by mandamus attempt to control the discretion of subordinate bodies acting within the limits of discretion vested in them by law. Where courts do interfere, it is upon the theory that the action is so capricious and arbitrary as to evidence a total failure to exercise discretion and is, therefore, not a valid act.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“according to his best knowledge and belief”
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.