Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 75 Wash. 2d 715 - Smith v. Skagit County

75 Wash. 2d 715 - Smith v. Skagit County’s Empirical Analysis

1969

Citation profile

126
cited by 126 later decisions
6
states following
July 2021
most recently cited

4 federal appellate · 119 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 126 later decisions — most recently July 2021 · most notably Progressive Animal Welfare Society v. University of Washington (1994), 97 Wash. 2d 317 - Franklin County Sheriff's Office v. Sellers (1982)

4 federal appellate · 119 state decisions

4101969197019801990200020102020decided

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 Shields v. Utah Idaho Central Railroad · Hart v. Bayless Investment & Trading Company · Parsons v. Board of Zoning Appeals · Cassel v. Mayor of Baltimore · 47 Wash. 2d 629 - Lillions v. Gibbs

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

  1. “`by which a smaller area is singled out of a larger area or district and specially zoned for a use classification totally different from and inconsistent with the classification of surrounding land, and not in accordance with the comprehensive plan. ... The vice of a spot zone is its inevitable effect of granting a discriminatory benefit to one or a group of owners and to the detriment of their neighbors or the community without adequate public advantage or justification.'”
    11 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “[W]here the record both at trial and on appeal consists entirely of written and graphic material — documents, reports, maps, charts, official data and the like — and the trial court has not seen nor heard testimony requiring it to assess the credibility or competency of witnesses, and to weigh the evidence, nor reconcile conflicting evidence, then on appeal a court of review stands in the same position as the trial court in looking at the facts of the case and should review the record de novo.”
    8 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “everyone had been heard who, in all fairness, should have been heard.”
    3 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.