Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 67 Wash. 2d 799 - Hughes v. State

67 Wash. 2d 799 - Hughes v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1966

Citation profile

12
cited by 12 later decisions
4
cited 4 times by the Supreme Court
1
states following
June 1982
most recently cited

2 district · 6 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 12 later decisions (4 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 1982

2 district · 6 state decisions

50196619701980decided

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 Shively v. Bowlby · Bandy v. United States · Borax Consolidated, Ltd. v. Los Angeles · United States v. California · Eisenbach v. Hatfield

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

  1. “The foregoing decisions of the highest judicial tribunal of the United States, without other or further authority, would seem to settle, beyond controversy, the question of title to the tide lands of this state, and to leave no doubt whatever that they belong to the state in actual propriety, and that the state has full power to dispose of the same, subject to no restrictions save those imposed upon the legislature by the constitution of the state and the constitution of the United States; and, if this be true, it necessarily follows that no individual can have any legal right whatever to claim any easement in, or to impose any servitude upon, the tide waters within the limits of the state, without the consent of the legislature.”
    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.