State v. Lamprey’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

6 state decisions

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

1. ““Moreover, the proceeding is a proceeding in court, as contradistinguished from a proceeding before the judge at chambers, and it is so framed that an issue of fact therein may be tried by a jury, and a money judgment for damages awarded as a part of the relief. The statute also provides that if ‘judgment be given for the applicant he may recover the damages which he has sustained, . . . and a peremptory mandate must also be awarded without delay;’ thus clearly making a distinction between the judgment and the peremptory writ. . . . “It must follow, we think, that before a peremptory writ of mandamus can properly issue, a formal judgment authorizing it must be entered determining the nature and extent of the relief granted.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State Ex Rel. Nesbitt v. Baughman

2. ““It must follow, we think, that before a peremptory writ of mandamus can properly issue, a formal judgment authorizing it must be entered determining the nature and extent of the relief granted.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 33 Wash. 2d 321 - State Ex Rel. Amende v. City of Bremerton