previously established rule (Washington) · Go Syfert
← Washington issues

previously established rule in Washington

6 Washington opinions name it 2 courts 1994–2017 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.

Followed or applied (1)

CaseFollowedCited
King County v. Washington State Boundary Review Boardgreen
wash · 1993 · cited in 1 Washington opinions naming this issue, 1994–1994
2 sentences

1994See, e.g., King Cy. v. State Boundary Review Bd., 122 Wn.2d 648, 672-73 , 860 P.2d 1024 (1993); Fisher v. Employment Sec.

1994See, e.g., King Cy. v. State Boundary Review Bd., 122 Wn.2d 648, 672-73 , 860 P.2d 1024 (1993); Fisher v. Employment Sec.

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Washington. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (7)

CaseCitedYears
Riehl v. Foodmaker, Inc. green
wash · 2004
2 sentences

2006Under the doctrine of stare decisis, this court will abandon a previously established rule only upon "'a clear showing that [the] rule is incorrect and harmful.'" Riehl v. Foodmaker, Inc., 152 Wash.2d 138, 147 , 94 P.3d 930 (2004) (quoting In re Rights to Waters of Stranger Creek, 77 Wash.2d 649, 653 , 466 P.2d 508 (1970)).

2006Under the doctrine of stare decisis, this court will abandon a previously established rule only upon “ ‘a clear showing that [the] rule is incorrect and harmful.’ ”Riehl v. Foodmaker, Inc., 152 Wn.2d 138, 147 , 94 P.3d 930 (2004) (quoting In re Rights to Waters of Stranger Creek, 77 Wn.2d 649, 653 , 466 P.2d 508 (1970)).

22006–2006
In Re Stranger Creek green
wash · 1970
2 sentences

2006Under the doctrine of stare decisis, this court will abandon a previously established rule only upon “ ‘a clear showing that [the] rule is incorrect and harmful.’ ”Riehl v. Foodmaker, Inc., 152 Wn.2d 138, 147 , 94 P.3d 930 (2004) (quoting In re Rights to Waters of Stranger Creek, 77 Wn.2d 649, 653 , 466 P.2d 508 (1970)).

2006Under the doctrine of stare decisis, this court will abandon a previously established rule only upon “ ‘a clear showing that [the] rule is incorrect and harmful.’ ”Riehl v. Foodmaker, Inc., 152 Wn.2d 138, 147 , 94 P.3d 930 (2004) (quoting In re Rights to Waters of Stranger Creek, 77 Wn.2d 649, 653 , 466 P.2d 508 (1970)).

22006–2006
Riehl v. Foodmaker, Inc. green
wash · 2004
2 sentences

2006Under the doctrine of stare decisis, this court will abandon a previously established rule only upon "'a clear showing that [the] rule is incorrect and harmful.'" Riehl v. Foodmaker, Inc., 152 Wash.2d 138, 147 , 94 P.3d 930 (2004) (quoting In re Rights to Waters of Stranger Creek, 77 Wash.2d 649, 653 , 466 P.2d 508 (1970)).

2006Under the doctrine of stare decisis, this court will abandon a previously established rule only upon “ ‘a clear showing that [the] rule is incorrect and harmful.’ ”Riehl v. Foodmaker, Inc., 152 Wn.2d 138, 147 , 94 P.3d 930 (2004) (quoting In re Rights to Waters of Stranger Creek, 77 Wn.2d 649, 653 , 466 P.2d 508 (1970)).

22006–2006
United States v. Halper red
scotus · 1989
2 sentences

1998The Court disavowed the method of analysis used in Halper, 490 U.S. 435 , and reaffirmed the previously established rule exemplified in Ward, 448 U.S. 242 .

1998The Court disavowed the method of analysis used in Halper, 490 U.S. 435 , 109 S.Ct. 1892 , and reaffirmed the previously established rule exemplified in Ward, 448 U.S. 242 , 100 S.Ct. 2636 .

21998–1998
Hudson v. United States green
scotus · 1997
2 sentences

1998Hudson, 522 U.S. at 96 .

1998Hudson , ___ U.S. at ___, 118 S.Ct. at 491 .

21998–1998
United States v. Ward green
scotus · 1980
2 sentences

1998The Court disavowed the method of analysis used in Halper, 490 U.S. 435 , and reaffirmed the previously established rule exemplified in Ward, 448 U.S. 242 .

1998The Court disavowed the method of analysis used in Halper, 490 U.S. 435 , 109 S.Ct. 1892 , and reaffirmed the previously established rule exemplified in Ward, 448 U.S. 242 , 100 S.Ct. 2636 .

21998–1998
State v. Otton green
wash · 2016
2 sentences

2017State v. Otton, 185 Wn.2d 673, 678 , 374 P.3d 1108 (2016); Int'!

2017State v. Otton, 185 Wn.2d 673, 678 , 374 P.3d 1108 (2016); Int'!

12017–2017

Statutes the citing opinions construe

WA § Wash. Rev. Code § 34.05.570 (3)

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.

Where else courts name it

WA 6 (1994–2017) OH 4 (1999–2003) CA 4 (1966–2014) NY 4 (1896–1935) MA 3 (1998–2000) TX 3 (1975–1998) NJ 3 (1987–2006) CT 2 (2009–2010) AZ 2 (1982–1991) OR 2 (1973–2013) NC 2 (1982–1985)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check