State v. Rodman

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• rejecting argument that no-contact orders are inoperative until a defendant's release
• rejecting argument that no-contact orders are inoperative until a defendant’s release
• “A statute must be construed so that no word, clause, or sentence is superfluous or insignificant.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

7 cases in this archive cite this case.

• State v. Snapp
  Court of Appeals of Washington· 2004-01-06· cited 34×
• State v. Argueta
  Court of Appeals of Washington· 2001-07-23· cited 21×
• Sintra, Inc. v. City of Seattle
  Court of Appeals of Washington· 1999-07-19· cited 12×
• State v. Kistner
  Court of Appeals of Washington· 2001-04-23· cited 3×
• State v. Swiger
  Court of Appeals of Washington· 2005-11-10· cited 2×
• Robertson v. Washington State Parks
  Court of Appeals of Washington· 2005-11-28· cited 2×
• State v. Argueta
  Court of Appeals of Washington· 2001-10-08

Cites

3 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• State v. Thomas
  Washington Supreme Court· 1993-05-20· cited 47×
• State v. Parada
  Court of Appeals of Washington· 1994-08-01· cited 19×
• State v. Jackson
  Court of Appeals of Washington· 1998-06-22· cited 15×