Personnel Appeals Board does not have express or implied authority to award attorney fees to prevailing party in proceeding before the board
How later courts described this case
- Personnel Appeals Board does not have express or implied authority to award attorney fees to prevailing party in proceeding before the board
- in order to give effect to the intent of the Legislature, an ambiguous statute "must be read as a whole; intent is not to be determined by a single . . . phrase"
- "Where statutory language is plain and unambiguous, a statute's meaning must be derived from the wording of the statute itself."
- victim of age discrimination may seek relief under RCW 49.60.030
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
Rosellini, J.
(concurring) — I do not find in the legislative history described in the majority opinion any indication of the Legislature's intent with respect to the award of damages. Furthermore, I disagree with an approach to statutory interpretation which looks first to legislative history, and only later to the language of the statute, where the intent of the law ought to be revealed. I do agree, however, that the language itself shows no intent to give the administrative agency the power of determining and awarding damages, except as specifically provided in the statutes. There is no authority conferred in RCW 49.60.250 to award *131 damages for humiliation and mental suffering.
Brachtenbach, C.J., and Utter, J., concur with Rosel-LINI, J.
Reconsideration denied May 20, 1982.