Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 9 Wash. App. 708 - Zook v. Baier

9 Wash. App. 708 - Zook v. Baier’s Empirical Analysis

1973

Citation profile

23
cited by 23 later decisions
3
states following
October 2024
most recently cited

23 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 23 later decisions — most recently October 2024

23 state decisions

80197319801990200020102020decided

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 11 U.S.C. § 103

Relies on Schall v. Camors · 75 Wash. 2d 800 - Moyer v. Clark · 73 Wash. 2d 804 - Detrick v. Garretson Packing Co. · 46 Wash. 2d 776 - Sandberg v. Spoelstra · Hines v. Foster

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

  1. “The doctrine excuses an unfortunate human choice of action that would be subject to criticism as negligent were it not that the party was suddenly faced with a situation which gave him no time to reflect upon which choice was the best. When, as here, there were not alternatives available but only an instant of time on a slippery road for a single instinctive reaction, an emergency doctrine instruction was doubly improper.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “An instruction on sudden emergency is appropriate when the emergency is not brought about, in whole or in part, by the negligence of the party seeking to invoke the doctrine.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “The rule [the emergency doctrine] is applicable only after a person has been placed in a position of peril and there is a choice between courses of action after the peril has arisen. Sandberg v. Spoelstra, 46 Wn.2d 776 , 285 P.2d 564 (1955); Restatement (Second) of Torts § 296 (1965).”
    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.