86 Wash. 2d 293 - Brown v. MacPherson's, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
1975
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 111 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 118 later decisions — most recently September 2023 · most notably Folsom v. Burger King (1998), 100 Wash. 2d 275 - Chambers-Castanes v. King County (1983)
3 federal appellate · 111 state decisions
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 Federal Crop Ins Corporation v. Merrill · 83 Wash. 2d 491 - Morris v. McNicol · Fair v. United States · Spaulding v. United States · 19 Cal. App. 3d 769 - Donald v. Garry
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 118 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“One who undertakes, albeit gratuitously, to render aid to or warn a person in danger is required by our law to exercise reasonable care in his efforts, however commendable. Jay v. Walla Walla College, 53 Wash.2d 590, 595 , 335 P.2d 458 (1959); French v. Chase, 48 Wash.2d 825, 830 , 297 P.2d 235 (1956). If a rescuer fails to exercise such care and consequently increases the risk of harm to those he is trying to assist, he is liable for any physical damages he causes. Spaulding v. United States, 455 F.2d 222 (9th Cir.1972); Hill v. United States Fid. & Guar. Co., 428 F.2d 112 (5th Cir.1970); United States v. Gavagan, 280 F.2d 319 (5th Cir.1960); Owl Drug Co. v. Crandall , 52 Ariz. 322 , 80 P.2d 952 (1938); Zelenko v. Gimbel Bros., 158 Misc. 904 , 287 N.Y.S. 134 (1935), aff'd, 247 A.D. 867 , 287 N.Y.S. 136 (1936); Sheridan v. Aetna Cas. & Sur. Co., 3 Wash.2d 423, 437-39 , 100 P.2d 1024 (1940); Restatement (Second) of Torts § 323(a) (1965) [ [13] ]; W. Prosser, Torts § 56 (4th ed.1971). If the State's agents, acting out of concern for the safety of appellants and others similarly situated, negligently or intentionally conveyed the impression that the danger of avalanches was less than it was to Mr. MacPherson (or anyone else), causing him to refrain from action on appellants' behalf he otherwise would have taken, the State is answerable for any damage caused by that misimpression.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage“The court in Brown held ... that the plaintiffs' allegations stated a possible cause of action for misfeasance; i.e., "the State's agents undertook to prevent the avalanche damage by conferring with [the real estate broker], in effect to rescue [the plaintiffs] from their danger, but in the process... negligently misled [the broker] and thus made [the plaintiffs'] situation worse...." The court ... also held that under the facts alleged by the plaintiffs, the State could be held liable for nonfeasance; i.e., the representation of the State employee to the avalanche expert that he would take care of the matter caused the expert to refrain from warning the plaintiffs himself. In other words, the State assumed a duty to warn, upon which the expert relied, then did not perform the duty.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“If the State's agents, acting out of concern for the safety of appellants and others similarly situated, negligently or intentionally conveyed the impression that the danger of avalanches was less than it was to Mr. MacPherson (or anyone else), causing him to refrain from action on appellants' behalf he otherwise would have taken, the State is answerable for any damage caused by that misimpression.”
2 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.