Bruff v. Main’s Empirical Analysis
1997
Citation profile
4 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 82 Wash. 2d 265 - State v. RALPH WILLIAMS'NW CHRYSLER · 122 Wash. 2d 471 - Jones v. Stebbins · 74 Wash. App. 781 - Matter of Marriage of Logg · 67 Wash. App. 548 - Lepeska v. Farley · 52 Wash. App. 576 - Kent v. Lee
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.
“in Washington. Counsel also appended declarations from two investigators who had attempted to serve Main personally. One investigator stated that he was unable to locate Main through the two addresses listed on the police report or through Department of Licensing and Department of Motor Vehicle records, which still listed the Mill Creek address for Main. The second investigator, Michael Schoonover, knew Main from”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Bruff v. Main“and stated that the best source of information for locating him was his parents. Schoonover located Main's parents in British Columbia and spoke with Main's father, who said that he did not have a current address for Main, but that he was living in the Seattle area. The Bruffs have cited no authority to support the proposition that a person's lack of a”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Bruff v. Main
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.