39 Wash. 2d 191 - Power, Inc. v. Huntley’s Empirical Analysis
1951
Citation profile
54 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 56 later decisions — most recently August 2023 · most notably State v. Thorne (1996), Amalgamated Transit v. State (2000)
54 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on Dawson v. Kentucky Distilleries & Warehouse Co. · Educational Films Corporation of America v. Ward · People ex rel. Drake v. Mahaney · Stewart Dry Goods Co. v. Lewis · Macallen Co v. Commonwealth of Massachusetts
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 56 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"[T]he Constitution does provide that if only one subject is embraced in the title, then any subject not expressed in the title that is not embraced in the body of the act, may be rejected, and the part that is expressed in the title be allowed to stand[.]"”
5 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Thomas · State v. Cloud“Article 2, section 19 of our state constitution has a dual purpose: (1) to prevent "logrolling", or pushing legislation through by attaching it to other necessary or desirable legislation, and (2) to assure that the members of the legislature and the public are generally aware of what is contained in proposed new laws. Thus, when an appropriations act defines rights or amends existing laws, the act violates article 2, section 19.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“neither the appropriation bill, ... nor the corporation income tax bill, ... standing on its own merits, could pass the legislature in the special session, but when the proponents of these measures combined their interests, both were enacted.”
4 later decisions 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.