4 Wash. App. 616 - Dobbins v. Beal’s Empirical Analysis
1971
Citation profile
7 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently June 1994
7 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 Milliken v. Meyer · Pennoyer v. Neff · Hess v. Pawloski · Henry McDonald v. F a Mabee · 56 Wash. 2d 652 - Tellier v. Edwards
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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““When the defendant cannot be found within the state (of which the return of the sheriff of the county in which the action is brought, that the defendant cannot be found in the county, is prima facie evidence), and upon the filing of an affidavit of the plaintiff, his agent, or attorney, with the clerk of the court, stating that he believes that the defendant is not a resident of the state, or cannot be found therein, and that he has deposited a copy of the summons (substantially in the form prescribed in RCW 4.28.110) and complaint in the post office, directed to the defendant at his place of residence, unless it is stated in the affidavit that such residence is not known to the affiant, and stating the existence of one of the cases hereinafter specified, the service may be made by publication of the summons, by the plaintiff or his attorney in any of the following cases: “ (4) When the action is for divorce in the cases prescribed by law;””
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[S]ummons by publication is permitted if: 1. The defendant cannot be found in the state . . . 2. Plaintiff, his agent, or attorney files an affidavit stating that he believes the defendant cannot be found in the state. 3. A copy of the summons has been mailed if the residence is known. 4. There is a statement in the affidavit that . . . the defendant, being a resident of this state, has departed therefrom with intent to defraud his creditors, or to avoid the service of a summons, or keeps himself concealed therein with like intent.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“(2) When the defendant, being a resident of this state, has departed therefrom with intent to defraud his creditors, or to avoid the service of a summons, or keeps himself concealed therein with like intent;”
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.