Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 85 Wash. 2d 821 - Metropolitan Park District v. State

85 Wash. 2d 821 - Metropolitan Park District v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1975

Citation profile

16
cited by 16 later decisions
2
states following
June 2010
most recently cited

16 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 16 later decisions — most recently June 2010

16 state decisions

7019751980199020002010decided

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 74 Wash. 2d 161 - Finch v. Matthews · 28 Wash. 2d 1 - State v. Northwest Magnesite Co. · 83 Wash. 2d 618 - Shafer v. State · 77 Wash. 2d 271 - Leonard v. Washington Employers, Inc. · 66 Wash. 2d 135 - State Ex Rel. Shannon v. Sponburgh

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

  1. “(1) an admission, statement, or act inconsistent with the claim afterwards asserted, (2) action by the other party on the faith of such admission, statement, or act; and (3) injury to such other party resulting from allowing the first party to contradict or repudiate such admission, statement, or act.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “it will receive no better treatment than any two private individuals who bring their dispute before the courts for final resolution.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “Ultra vires acts are those done `wholly without legal authorization or in direct violation of existing statutes.'”
    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.