State v. Tenney’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

4 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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““It seems too clear to admit of argument to the contrary that this is not an appeal from the final judgment rendered upon the verdict; but is an attempted appeal from the order denying the motion to vacate the judgment. This court has held, in harmony with the rule elsewhere, that such an order is not appealable for the purpose of reviewing errors committed by the trial court affecting the correctness of the judgment sought to be vacated. “In Sound Investment Co. v. Fairhaven Land Co., 45 Wash. 262 , 88 Pac. 198 , this question was critically examined in the light of the court’s previous decisions, where at page 263 the court said: “ ‘It has been the uniform ruling of this court that a motion to vacate a judgment does not affect a substantial right, if the errors complained of are errors of law occurring at the trial; that such errors cannot be reviewed in a motion to vacate, and that, therefore, no substantial right could be invaded by a denial of the motion. ’ “To permit an appeal from such an order would in effect enable a losing party to extend the statutory time for taking an appeal to review, errors occurring in the cause in which the judgment is rendered.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Peha's University Food Shop v. Stimpson Corp.