State v. Chapman’s Empirical Analysis
1999
Citation profile
3 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 121 Wash. 2d 513 - Erection Co. v. Department of Labor & Industries · Millay v. Cam · State v. Dejarlais · 47 Wash. App. 165 - State v. Enloe · 124 Wash. 2d 855 - Associated Gen. Contractors of Washington v. KING CTY.
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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Here, as in Jacques, the geographic scope of the order excludes [Respondent] Chapman from more than [Ms.] Titch-ell’s residence, workplace, school or day care. RCW 26.50.060(l)(b) does not authorize a court to exclude a respondent from any particular distance from such sites. Because we cannot read words into a statute that are not there, see Henley v. Henley, [citation omitted] we conclude that [Respondent] was not subject to criminal prosecution for coming within one mile of [Lisa] Titchell’s residence.[ 26 ]”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Chapman
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.