Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 51 Wash. 2d 830 - State v. Reynolds

51 Wash. 2d 830 - State v. Reynolds’s Empirical Analysis

1958

Citation profile

30
cited by 30 later decisions
1
states following
November 1995
most recently cited

30 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 30 later decisions — most recently November 1995 · most notably 89 Wash. 2d 613 - State v. Young (1978), 79 Wash. 2d 512 - State v. Randecker (1971)

30 state decisions

20019581960197019801990decided

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 State v. Knizek · State v. Burnett

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

  1. “Whether there is evidence legally sufficient to go to the jury is a question of law for the court, but where there is any evidence, however slight, and the evidence is conflicting or is such that reasonable minds may draw different conclusions therefrom, the question is for the jury.”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “"`A challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence or a motion having that effect admits the truth of the evidence of the party against whom the challenge or motion is made and all inferences that reasonably can be drawn from such evidence, and requires that the evidence be interpreted most strongly against the challenger or movant party and in the light most favorable to the opposing party....'" (Quoting from State v. Lutes, 38 Wn.2d 475, 481 , 230 P.2d 786 , (1951).)”
    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.