84 Wash. App. 369 - Millay v. Cam’s Empirical Analysis
1996
Citation profile
4 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 102 Wash. 2d 355 - United Parcel Service, Inc. v. Department of Revenue · 92 Wash. 2d 844 - Clallam County Deputy Sheriff's Guild v. Board of Clallam County Commissioners · 32 Colo. App. 254 - Osborn Hardware Company v. Colorado Corporation · 102 Wash. 2d 327 - DiNino v. State · 63 Wash. App. 405 - Shum v. Department of Labor & Industries
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.
“When a sheriff wrongfully refuses to allow any person to redeem, the right to redeem shall not be prejudiced by such refusal, and the sheriff may be required, by order of the court, to allow such redemption.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Millay v. Cam“first redeem in accordance with such sworn statement, and if he or she desires to bring an action for an accounting thereafter he or she may do so within thirty days after such redemption, but not later.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Millay v. Cam“This omission indicates that the Legislature did not intend to provide any preredemption procedure for disputing the `sum required.'”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Millay v. Cam
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.