Stranberg v. Lasz’s Empirical Analysis
2003
Citation profile
3 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Griffith v. United States · 115 Wash. 2d 657 - Berg v. Hudesman · Target Corp. v. Hollister · 125 Wash. 2d 337 - Mt. Park Homeowners Ass'n, Inc. v. Tydings · 121 Wash. 2d 52 - Bowles v. Department of Retirement Systems
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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A provision is not ambiguous merely because the parties suggest opposing meanings.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“However, the interpretation of an unambiguous contract is a question of law.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“A court may look to parole evidence to explain an ambiguity in a contract.”
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.