87 Wash. App. 468 - Phillips v. King County’s Empirical Analysis
1997
Citation profile
39 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 39 later decisions — most recently January 2024 · most notably Phillips v. King County (1998), Lakey v. Puget Sound Energy, Inc. (2013)
39 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
Applies 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on McKart v. United States · 98 Wash. 2d 434 - Wilson v. Steinbach · 118 Wash. 2d 801 - Cowiche Canyon Conservancy v. Bosley · 112 Wash. 2d 216 - Young v. Key Pharmaceuticals, Inc. · Hamilton v. Texas
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 39 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The [exhaustion] doctrine is founded on the principle that the judiciary should give proper deference to that body possessing expertise in areas outside the conventional experience of judges, so that the administrative process will not be interrupted prematurely, so that the agency can develop the necessary factual background on which to reach its decision, so that the agency will have the opportunity to exercise its expertise and to correct its own errors, and so as not to encourage individuals to ignore administrative procedures by resorting to the courts prematurely.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“Although the Wilber court did not directly hold that a municipality by the mere approval of a private developer's drainage plan accomplishes a constitutional taking, such a holding would appear to be implicit in the ruling.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“[t]he state itself cannot take or damage private property for a public use, without compensating the owner; nor can it authorize a taking or damaging which is prohibited to it,”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
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.