Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
28 Washington opinions name it 2 courts 1994–2021 2 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Washington courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
State v. Bacongreen2 sentences2019See State v. Bacon, 190 Wn.2d 458, 466-67 , 415 P.3d 207 (2018). 2019See State v. Bacon, 190 Wn.2d 458, 466-67 , 415 P.3d 207 (2018). | 2 | 2 |
Kreidler v. Eikenberrygreen2 sentences2003See Kreidler v. Eikenberry, 111 Wn.2d 828, 835 , 766 P.2d 438 (1989). 2003See Kreidler v. Eikenberry, 111 Wn.2d 828, 835 , 766 P.2d 438 (1989). | 2 | 2 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Washington. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Koenig v. City of Des Moines
green
2 sentences2021This is distinct from the ordinary definition of “provides” and therefore satisfies the statutory construction rule that “[w]hen the legislature employs different terms in a statute, we presume a different meaning for each term.” Koenig v. City of Des Moines, 158 Wn.2d 173, 182 , 142 P.3d 162 (2006). 2021This is distinct from the ordinary definition of “provides” and therefore satisfies the statutory construction rule that “[w]hen the legislature employs different terms in a statute, we presume a different meaning for each term.” Koenig v. City of Des Moines, 158 Wn.2d 173, 182 , 142 P.3d 162 (2006). | 2 | 2021–2021 |
Koenig v. City of Des Moines
green
2 sentences2021This is distinct from the ordinary definition of “provides” and therefore satisfies the statutory construction rule that “[w]hen the legislature employs different terms in a statute, we presume a different meaning for each term.” Koenig v. City of Des Moines, 158 Wn.2d 173, 182 , 142 P.3d 162 (2006). 2021This is distinct from the ordinary definition of “provides” and therefore satisfies the statutory construction rule that “[w]hen the legislature employs different terms in a statute, we presume a different meaning for each term.” Koenig v. City of Des Moines, 158 Wn.2d 173, 182 , 142 P.3d 162 (2006). | 2 | 2021–2021 |
Cannon v. Department of Licensing
green
2 sentences2011Cannon, 147 Wn.2d at 57 . 2011Cannon, 147 Wash.2d at 57 , 50 P.3d 627 . | 2 | 2011–2011 |
In re the Detention of Martin
green
2 sentences2011Martin, 163 Wash.2d at 506 , 182 P.3d 951 . 2011Martin, 163 Wn.2d at 506 . | 2 | 2011–2011 |
State v. Sullivan
green
2 sentences2005State v. J.P., 149 Wn.2d 444, 450 , 69 P.3d 318 (2003); State v. Sullivan, 143 Wn.2d 162, 175 , 19 P.3d 1012 (2001). 2005State v. J.P., 149 Wash.2d 444, 450 , 69 P.3d 318 (2003); State v. Sullivan, 143 Wash.2d 162, 175 , 19 P.3d 1012 (2001). | 2 | 2005–2005 |
State v. Shriner
green
2 sentences2005State v. Danforth, 97 Wn.2d 255, 257-59 , 643 P.2d 882 (1982); State v. Shriner, 101 Wn.2d 576, 580 , 681 P.2d 237 (1984). 2005State v. Danforth, 97 Wn.2d 255, 257-59 , 643 P.2d 882 (1982); State v. Shriner, 101 Wn.2d 576, 580 , 681 P.2d 237 (1984). | 2 | 2005–2005 |
State v. Sullivan
green
2 sentences2005State v. J.P., 149 Wn.2d 444, 450 , 69 P.3d 318 (2003); State v. Sullivan, 143 Wn.2d 162, 175 , 19 P.3d 1012 (2001). 2005State v. J.P., 149 Wash.2d 444, 450 , 69 P.3d 318 (2003); State v. Sullivan, 143 Wash.2d 162, 175 , 19 P.3d 1012 (2001). | 2 | 2005–2005 |
State v. J.P.
green
2 sentences2005State v. J.P., 149 Wn.2d 444, 450 , 69 P.3d 318 (2003); State v. Sullivan, 143 Wn.2d 162, 175 , 19 P.3d 1012 (2001). 2005State v. J.P., 149 Wash.2d 444, 450 , 69 P.3d 318 (2003); State v. Sullivan, 143 Wash.2d 162, 175 , 19 P.3d 1012 (2001). | 2 | 2005–2005 |
State v. JP
green
2 sentences2005State v. J.P., 149 Wn.2d 444, 450 , 69 P.3d 318 (2003); State v. Sullivan, 143 Wn.2d 162, 175 , 19 P.3d 1012 (2001). 2005State v. J.P., 149 Wash.2d 444, 450 , 69 P.3d 318 (2003); State v. Sullivan, 143 Wash.2d 162, 175 , 19 P.3d 1012 (2001). | 2 | 2005–2005 |
State v. Danforth
green
2 sentences2005State v. Danforth, 97 Wn.2d 255, 257-59 , 643 P.2d 882 (1982); State v. Shriner, 101 Wn.2d 576, 580 , 681 P.2d 237 (1984). 2005State v. Danforth, 97 Wn.2d 255, 257-59 , 643 P.2d 882 (1982); State v. Shriner, 101 Wn.2d 576, 580 , 681 P.2d 237 (1984). | 2 | 2005–2005 |
State v. Wilson
green
2 sentences2004State v. Wilson, 125 Wn.2d 212, 216-17 , 883 P.2d 320 (1994) (a statute that is clear does not require the application of statutory construction rules). 2004State v. Wilson, 125 Wn.2d 212, 216-17 , 883 P.2d 320 (1994) (a statute that is clear does not require the application of statutory construction rules). | 2 | 2004–2004 |
Bowen v. Statewide City Employees Retirement System
green
2 sentences2004Thus, the statutory construction principle to construe ambiguous pension statutes “in favor of the party for whose benefit the pension statute was intended,” Bowen v. Statewide City Employees Retirement System, 72 Wn.2d 397, 402 , 433 P.2d 150 (1967), is inapplicable to the case at bar. 2004Thus, the statutory construction principle to construe ambiguous pension statutes “in favor of the party for whose benefit the pension statute was intended,” Bowen v. Statewide City Employees Retirement System, 72 Wn.2d 397, 402 , 433 P.2d 150 (1967), is inapplicable to the case at bar. | 2 | 2004–2004 |
State v. Roadhs
red
2 sentences2003Roadhs, 71 Wn.2d at 707 -08 (citing the statutory construction principle, “expressio unius est exclusio alterius”). 2003Therefore, the court interpreted the general term, “structure,” in a manner consistent with the specific term, “building.” Id. (citing the statutory construction principle “noscitur a sociis”). | 2 | 2003–2003 |
Beckman v. STATE, DEPT. OF SOCIAL SERV.
green
2 sentences2001App. 687 , 692, 11 P.3d 313 (2000). 7 The acceptability criteria found in subsection (2) are specific terms that flesh out the general terms in subsection (1). 2001The statutory construction rule of ejusdem generis states "general terms, when used in conjunction with specific terms, should be deemed to incorporate only those things similar in nature or `comparable to' the specific terms." Beckman v. Dep't of Soc. & Health Servs., 102 Wash.App. 687, 692 , 11 P.3d 313 (2000). [7] The acceptability criteria found in subsection (2) are specific terms that flesh out the general terms in subsection (1). | 2 | 2001–2001 |
Beckman v. Department of Social and Health Services
green
2 sentences2001The statutory construction rule of ejusdem generis states “general terms, when used in conjunction with specific terms, should be deemed to incorporate only those things similar in nature or ‘comparable to’ the specific terms.” Beckman v. Dep’t of Soc. & Health Servs., 102 Wn. 2001The statutory construction rule of ejusdem generis states "general terms, when used in conjunction with specific terms, should be deemed to incorporate only those things similar in nature or `comparable to' the specific terms." Beckman v. Dep't of Soc. & Health Servs., 102 Wash.App. 687, 692 , 11 P.3d 313 (2000). [7] The acceptability criteria found in subsection (2) are specific terms that flesh out the general terms in subsection (1). | 2 | 2001–2001 |
State v. Acosta
green
2 sentences1996In support of this argument, the Defendant relies on the statutory construction analysis discussed in State v. McCullum, 98 Wn.2d 484 , 656 P.2d 1064 (1983) and State v. Acosta, 101 Wn.2d 612 , 683 P.2d 1069 (1984). 1996In support of this argument, the Defendant relies on the statutory construction analysis discussed in State v. McCullum, 98 Wn.2d 484 , 656 P.2d 1064 (1983) and State v. Acosta, 101 Wn.2d 612 , 683 P.2d 1069 (1984). | 2 | 1996–1996 |
State v. McCullum
green
2 sentences1996In support of this argument, the Defendant relies on the statutory construction analysis discussed in State v. McCullum, 98 Wn.2d 484 , 656 P.2d 1064 (1983) and State v. Acosta, 101 Wn.2d 612 , 683 P.2d 1069 (1984). 1996In support of this argument, the Defendant relies on the statutory construction analysis discussed in State v. McCullum, 98 Wn.2d 484 , 656 P.2d 1064 (1983) and State v. Acosta, 101 Wn.2d 612 , 683 P.2d 1069 (1984). | 2 | 1996–1996 |
State v. Larson
green
2 sentences2018State v. Larson, 184 Wn.2d 843, 849 , 365 P.3d 740 (2015). 2018State v. Larson, 184 Wn.2d 843, 849 , 365 P.3d 740 (2015). | 1 | 2018–2018 |
State v. Moses
green
1 sentence2013But the State ignores the well-settled statutory construction rule requiring us not to “read into the statute the language that [we] believe[ ] was omitted.” State v. Moses, 145 Wn.2d 370, 374 , 37 P.3d 1216 (2002). | 1 | 2013–2013 |
State v. Moses
green
1 sentence2013But the State ignores the well-settled statutory construction rule requiring us not to “read into the statute the language that [we] believe[ ] was omitted.” State v. Moses, 145 Wn.2d 370, 374 , 37 P.3d 1216 (2002). | 1 | 2013–2013 |
State v. Grier
green
1 sentence2013Grier, 168 Wn. | 1 | 2013–2013 |
In Re Detention of Martin
green
1 sentence2011Martin, 163 Wash.2d at 506 , 182 P.3d 951 . | 1 | 2011–2011 |
State, Department of Licensing v. Cannon
green
1 sentence2011Cannon, 147 Wash.2d at 57 , 50 P.3d 627 . | 1 | 2011–2011 |
Amalgamated Transit Union Legislative Council v. State
green
1 sentence2003Amalgamated Transit Union Legislative Council v. State, 145 Wn.2d 544, 552-57 , 40 P.3d 656 (2002) (where certain statutes are explicitly repealed by a new law, a statute that was not explicitly repealed is not repealed by implication where factors, such as legislative history and an attorney general opinion, were not sufficient to show legislative intent was to repeal the statute). | 1 | 2003–2003 |
ATU LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL OF STATE v. State
green
1 sentence2003Amalgamated Transit Union Legislative Council v. State, 145 Wn.2d 544, 552-57 , 40 P.3d 656 (2002) (where certain statutes are explicitly repealed by a new law, a statute that was not explicitly repealed is not repealed by implication where factors, such as legislative history and an attorney general opinion, were not sufficient to show legislative intent was to repeal the statute). | 1 | 2003–2003 |
State v. Young
green
2 sentences1994Reconsideration denied February 1, 1995. 1 RCW 19.40.011 et seq. 2 The statutory construction rule of ejusdem generis provides that "specific terms modify and restrict general terms where both are used in sequence.” State v. Young, 63 Wn. 1994App. 324, 331 , 818 P.2d 1375 (1991). 3 UFTA provides: "Unless displaced by the provisions of this chapter, the principles of law and equity . . . supplement its provisions.” RCW 19.40.902. | 1 | 1994–1994 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.