59 Wash. 2d 397 - Thompson v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis
1962
Citation profile
31 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 33 later decisions — most recently June 2012 · most notably 54 Wash. App. 632 - City of Edmonds v. Williams (1989), 58 Wash. App. 375 - Beebe v. Swerda (1990)
31 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 Colegrove Water Co. v. City of Hollywood · Greenwalt v. McCardell · New York Central Railroad v. Yarian · Kurz v. Blume · Bakeman v. . Talbot
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 33 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“`[t]he respective rights of the two parties ... are not absolute, but must be construed to permit a due and reasonable enjoyment ... so long as that is possible.'”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“[m]ere nonuse, for no matter how long a period, [does] not extinguish the easement”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“It would appear from the record that [defendant Gail] Smith, by his conduct, has made himself obnoxious to his neighbors; but that is no justification for depriving him of the present use of the south-ten feet of his property until it is required for road purposes, .... In fact, when and if a roadway is opened over the strips reserved for that purpose, it may be that the grade will be such that the slab will need only to be covered over; but, if and when such a roadway is put in, the slab, if it is an interference, would have to be removed. However, we do not believe that a structure that could not be removed without substantial cost should be per mitted in such an easement, unless there is some guarantee that it will be removed if necessary.”
2 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.