# City of Tacoma v. William Rogers Co.

> Washington Supreme Court · December 19, 2002 · 148 Wash. 2d 169

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/4712376

## Case

- **Full name:** The City of Tacoma v. The William Rogers Company, Inc.
- **Court:** Washington Supreme Court
- **Decided:** December 19, 2002
- **Citations:** 148 Wash. 2d 169; 60 P.3d 79
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurring in part by Alexander
- **Judges:** Alexander, Chambers, Sanders
- **Cited by:** 28 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/4712376

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- affirming that a conclusion of law erroneously labeled as a finding of fact is nevertheless reviewed as a conclusion of law

## Opinion text

Alexander, C. J.
(concurring in the dissent) — I agree with Justice Sanders that we should affirm the trial court. I write separately simply to indicate that my agreement with Justice Sanders is based solely on the conclusion we both reach that the William Rogers Company, Inc., doing business as Evergreen Staffing qualifies for the “pass-through” *182 exemption set forth in Tacoma’s administrative rule 111. The facts of this case are essentially identical to those in Rho Co. v. Department of Revenue, 113 Wn.2d 561 , 782 P.2d 986 (1989), and the decision in that case should dictate our ruling here. I am not, however, prepared to join Justice Sanders’ conclusion that the funds representing labor costs do not constitute gross income. As the majority observes, Evergreen has not made that argument and, thus, we should not address it.
Madsen, J., concurs with Alexander, C.J.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/4712376. Public record. Not legal advice.