# Fitzpatrick v. Okanogan County

> Court of Appeals of Washington · January 22, 2008 · 143 Wash. App. 288

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/4752283

## Case

- **Full name:** Don L. Fitzpatrick v. Okanogan County
- **Court:** Court of Appeals of Washington
- **Decided:** January 22, 2008
- **Citations:** 143 Wash. App. 288
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Brown
- **Judges:** Brown, Schultheis
- **Cited by:** 2 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/4752283

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- explaining Sund, 43 Wn.2d 36; Halverson, 139 Wn.2d 1

## Opinion text

*304 ¶43 I would affirm the summary judgment grant for Okanogan County and the State on two grounds. First, the common enemy rule applies as a defense to this flooding claim. Halverson v. Skagit County, 139 Wn.2d 1, 13-15 , 983 P.2d 643 (1999). Moreover, the State lacks the necessary proprietary interest in the Sloan-Witchert Slough Dike to attach liability under Halverson . Even considering their inverse condemnation theory, the Fitzpatricks’ proposed watercourse exception to the general rule of non-liability would effectively eliminate the common enemy rule as developed in Washington for over 100 years. Second, even if the common enemy rule did not apply, I would hold that statutory immunity applies to the County under RCW 86.12.037 and to the State under RCW 86.16.071. Accordingly, I respectfully dissent.
Brown, J.
Review granted at 164 Wn.2d 1008 (2008).

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/4752283. Public record. Not legal advice.