97 Wash. App. 950 - Moe v. Wise’s Empirical Analysis
1999
Citation profile
38 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 11 U.S.C. § 101 (Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005) · 11 U.S.C. § 1102 · 11 U.S.C. § 1103
Relies on Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · New York Times Co. v. Sullivan · Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc. · St. Amant v. Thompson · 79 Wash. 2d 12 - State Ex Rel. Carroll v. Junker
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 42 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The common interest privilege applies when the declarant and the recipient have a common interest in the subject matter of the communication.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Momah v. Bharti“the plaintiff must offer evidence sufficient to permit a reasonable trier of fact to find clear and convincing proof”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“arises when parties need to speak freely and openly about subjects of common organizational or pecuniary interest.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Momah v. Bharti
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.