Heaton v. Imus’s Empirical Analysis
1978
Citation profile
4 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 74 Wash. 2d 25 - Prier v. Refrigeration Engineering Co. · 65 Wash. 2d 817 - Bignold v. King County · 67 Wash. 2d 514 - Plumbing Shop, Inc. v. Pitts · 49 Wash. 2d 363 - Milone & Tucci, Inc. v. Bona Fide Builders, Inc. · 6 Wash. App. 74 - Dravo Corp. v. L. W. Moses Co.
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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Heaton argues that the trial court erred in failing to award reasonable profit. His argument might be well taken had the trial court found an implied in fact contract. Bignold v. King County, 65 Wn.2d 817, 826 , 399 P.2d 611 (1965); Losli v. Foster, 37 Wn.2d 220, 232 , 222 P.2d 824 (1950). Here, however, the trial court based its award on principles of quasi contract, thereby excepting reasonable profit as a factor for consideration. Dravo Corp. v. L.W. Moses Co. [ 6 Wn. App. 74, 92 , 492 P.2d 1058 (1971)].”
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.