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.
8 Washington opinions name it 2 courts 1895–2009 0 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 |
|---|---|---|
| No positive-treatment citations attached to this issue in Washington. | ||
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Washington. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Harper v. Virginia Department of Taxation
green
2 sentences2009Id. at 77, 830 P.2d 318 . ¶ 44 Then, a year after Robinson was decided, the Court explicitly held in Harper, 509 U.S. at 97 , 113 S.Ct. 2510 , that when it applied "a rule of federal law to the parties before it, that rule is the controlling interpretation of federal law and must be given full retroactive effect in all cases still open on direct review and as to all events, regardless of whether such events predate or postdate" the court's announcement of the rule. 2009Id. at 77 . ¶44 Then, a year after Robinson was decided, the Court explicitly held in Harper, 509 U.S. at 97 , that when it applied “a rule of federal law to the parties before it, that rule is the controlling interpretation of federal law and must be given full retroactive effect in all cases still open on direct review and as to all events, regardless of whether such events predate or postdate” the court’s announcement of the rule. | 2 | 2009–2009 |
Robinson v. City of Seattle
red
2 sentences2009Id. at 77, 830 P.2d 318 . ¶ 44 Then, a year after Robinson was decided, the Court explicitly held in Harper, 509 U.S. at 97 , 113 S.Ct. 2510 , that when it applied "a rule of federal law to the parties before it, that rule is the controlling interpretation of federal law and must be given full retroactive effect in all cases still open on direct review and as to all events, regardless of whether such events predate or postdate" the court's announcement of the rule. 2009Id. at 77 . ¶44 Then, a year after Robinson was decided, the Court explicitly held in Harper, 509 U.S. at 97 , that when it applied “a rule of federal law to the parties before it, that rule is the controlling interpretation of federal law and must be given full retroactive effect in all cases still open on direct review and as to all events, regardless of whether such events predate or postdate” the court’s announcement of the rule. | 2 | 2009–2009 |
Digital Equipment Corp. v. Department of Revenue
green
2 sentences2004Digital Equip., 129 Wash.2d at 186 , 916 P.2d 933 . 2004Digital Equip., 129 Wn.2d at 186 . | 2 | 2004–2004 |
DIGITAL EQUIP. v. State, Dept. of Rev.
green
1 sentence2004Digital Equip., 129 Wash.2d at 186 , 916 P.2d 933 . | 1 | 2004–2004 |
Ephraim v. Kelleher
neutral
2 sentences1911On the second proposition, it has been the law of this state since the announcement of the rule in Ephraim, v. Kelleher, 4 Wash. 243 , 29 Pac. 985 , 18 L. 1911On the second proposition, it has been the law of this state since the announcement of the rule in Ephraim, v. Kelleher, 4 Wash. 243 , 29 Pac. 985 , 18 L. | 1 | 1911–1911 |
Russell v. Place
green
1 sentence1901But this is no more than an announcement of the rule that in such case that which was adjudicated upon the merits of the action could not be again adjudicated; and while it is true that, in accordance with cases cited by appellants and many others, a judgment upon the pleadings is said by the courts to be a judgment upon the merits, it is not true with reference to the announcement made in Cromwell v. County of Sac, supra. In Russell v. Place, 94 U. S. 606 , in an action at law for damages for the infringement of a patent for an alleged new and' useful improvement in the preparation of leather | 1 | 1901–1901 |
Cromwell v. County of Sac
green
1 sentence1901But this is no more than an announcement of the rule that in such case that which was adjudicated upon the merits of the action could not be again adjudicated; and while it is true that, in accordance with cases cited by appellants and many others, a judgment upon the pleadings is said by the courts to be a judgment upon the merits, it is not true with reference to the announcement made in Cromwell v. County of Sac, supra. In Russell v. Place, 94 U. S. 606 , in an action at law for damages for the infringement of a patent for an alleged new and' useful improvement in the preparation of leather | 1 | 1901–1901 |
Klopp, Bartlett & Co. v. Creston City Guarantee Water-works Co.
neutral
2 sentences1898These cases, however, stand alone so far as the announcement of the doctrine is concerned that the service on the officer of a foreign corporation who is temporarily in the state is a good service, with the possible exception of Klopp v. Water Works Co., 34 Neb. 808 ( 52 N. W. 819 , 33 Am. 1898These cases, however, stand alone so far as the announcement of the doctrine is concerned that the service on the officer of a foreign corporation who is temporarily in the state is a good service, with the possible exception of Klopp v. Water Works Co., 34 Neb. 808 ( 52 N. W. 819 , 33 Am. | 1 | 1898–1898 |
Buhler v. Wentworth
neutral
1 sentence1895Butler v. Wentworth, 9 How. | 1 | 1895–1895 |
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.