Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 173 WASHAPP 435 - Bale v. Allison

Bale v. Allison’s Empirical Analysis

2013

Citation profile

5
cited by 5 later decisions
1
states following
September 2019
most recently cited

5 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on 82 Wash. 2d 736 - In Re Welfare of Sego · 60 Wash. 2d 122 - DeHeer v. Seattle Post-Intelligencer · 92 Wash. 2d 570 - Veach v. Culp · 126 Wash. 2d 36 - Moreman v. Butcher · 125 Wash. 2d 544 - Berg v. Ting

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

  1. ““[W]here a trial court finds that evidence is insufficient to persuade it that something occurred, an appellate court is simply not permitted to reweigh the evidence and come to a contrary finding. It invades the province of the trial court for an appellate court to find compelling that which the trial court found unpersuasive. Yet, that is what appellant wants this court to do. There was conflicting evidence in this case. The trial judge weighed that conflicting evidence and chose which of it to believe. That is the end of the story.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “costs, including reasonable attorneys’ fees ... to any party: (a) From any party to the proceedings .... The court may order the costs, including reasonable attorneys’ fees, to be paid in such amount and in such manner as the court determines to be equitable. In exercising its discretion under this section, the court may consider any and all factors that it deems to be relevant and appropriate, which factors may but need not include whether the litigation benefits the estate or trust involved.”
    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.