85 Wash. 2d 17 - Brown v. MacPherson's, Inc.’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. “THE STATE OF WASHINGTON, 1. WHILE IT and its officials and agents: a. Had specific knowledge of facts and circumstances showing that an extreme avalanche hazard existed in the area of the Edgers cabin at Yodelin, that winter time inhabitants thereof were in imminent danger and while its officials held the actual belief that such hazard existed b. Had the authority, power and duty to intervene, give or require warnings, and prevent a disaster c. Had given assurances to others that it would intervene which were relied upon d. And while the Edgers and others similarly situated were justifiably complacent in the common belief that the State would not permit such a real estate development in a hazardous area 2. IT FAILED TO: a. Give any warning thereof or to divulge any of the information it had regarding the danger to any of the Edgers household or to any other owners or inhabitants of the Yodelin Development b. Require the realtor, MacPhersons, Inc., or the developer, Nason Properties, Inc., to warn the Edgers or other owners or inhabitants of Yodelin c. Suspend, revoke or deny the license of MacPhersons, Inc., or to take other appropriate and authorized legal action against the realtor and/or developer d. Complete its investigation of the avalanche hazard in a proper manner or to require adequate avalanche information from MacPhersons or Nason Properties e. Adequately communicate with MacPhersons and Nason Properties and led them to believe that it had confidential information ”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 86 Wash. 2d 293 - Brown v. MacPherson's, Inc.

2. “exists or would be admissible at trial, as it should on a summary judgment motion. The question under a CR 12(b) (6) motion is basically a legal one, and the”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 86 Wash. 2d 293 - Brown v. MacPherson's, Inc.

3. “situation should not be that which the complaining party contends actually exists. The court need not find that any support for the alleged”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 86 Wash. 2d 293 - Brown v. MacPherson's, Inc.