Case law

King County v. Joyce

96 Wash. 520 · Washington Supreme Court · May 26, 1917

It was clearly not prejudicial, for it tended to sustain appellants’ theory of an abandonment. But there was no prejudice in this testimony. … The question of its value, though but remotely established, was submitted to the jury under a proper instruction and decided adversely to appellants. *528 IX.

Tidewater Terminal Co. v. State

60 Wash. 2d 155 · Washington Supreme Court · Jun 21, 1962

Furthermore, the period of time that the products remain in the storage facilities clearly indicates that they are not merely a conduit for a continuous flow from the incoming *161 to the outgoing facilities. … The court held that, under the circumstances, the continuity of the journey was not broken by the storage and the oil was therefore immune from state taxation.

Gerberg v. Crosby

52 Wash. 2d 792 · Washington Supreme Court · Aug 28, 1958

said: “Two mining engineers, who testified that they had had experience and observation in the use of explosives in large quantities, in answer to a hypothetical question which assumed facts which the evidence tended to establish … The basis for Hendren’s opinion was clearly brought out in his testimony, both on direct and cross examination. It was for the jury to determine what weight should be given it. Knight v. Borgan, supra; Grismore v.

Spokane Merchants Ass'n v. Clere Clothing Co.

84 Wash. 616 · Washington Supreme Court · Apr 5, 1915

This status being once established, as it clearly was, if evidence short of an admission can establish anything, it was incumbent upon the appellant to show that the Prager-Schlessinger Company was rehabilitated as an independent … This the evidence wholly fails to establish.

Tabb v. Funk

170 Wash. 545 · Washington Supreme Court · Dec 20, 1932

In 2 Lewis’ Sutherland, Statutory Construction (2d ed.), § 420, it is said: “ [Relative and qualifying- words and phrases, grammatically and legally, where no contrary intention appears, refer solely to the last antecedent … In the former case, it is said: “. . . a proviso carves special exceptions only out of the enacting clause, and those who set up any such exception must establish it as being within the words, as well as within the reason

Pearson v. City of Seattle

199 Wash. 217 · Washington Supreme Court · May 31, 1939

Ordinance No. 41014 relates to and regulates weights and measures and establishes standards therefor. … The intention of the city council so clearly appears from the face of the ordinance that there can be no question as to the intention of the city council; there is no room for construction.

Andersen v. Seattle Automobile Co.

147 Wash. 76 · Washington Supreme Court · Mar 14, 1928

Appellant insists that, in setting aside the verdict, the court clearly invaded the province of the jury. … True, what the unknown cause of the failure of the brakes to *84 hold was, was not definitely established; but certainly it was shown by all the evidence and reasonable inferences that it was not the fault of the driver.

Faucher v. Rosenoff

65 Wash. 416 · Washington Supreme Court · Oct 26, 1911

Respondent was elected on November 8, 1910, and qualified on January 9, 1911. … In that case we said: “The salary to be paid has been clearly and definitely fixed according to population.

International Ass'n of Firefighters, Local 1789 v. Spokane Airports

146 Wash. 2d 207 · Washington Supreme Court · Apr 25, 2002

It also sought a judgment requiring Airport to continue to contribute to each individual firefighter’s qualified retirement plan, of plaintiffs’ choosing, in the amount of 6.2% and 1.45% of each employee’s monthly wages for … The first two criteria are easily established.

PUD DISTRICT NO. 1, KLICKITAT COUNTY v. International Insurance Co.

124 Wash. 2d 789 · Washington Supreme Court · Oct 6, 1994

In February 1988, the MDL 551 court found the individuals were immune from liability, but found their immunity was waived to the extent they were insured from claims of the sort brought by the MDL 551 claimants. … They are clearly placed in policies to prevent the insurer from being prejudiced by the insured’s actions.

In re Pers. Restraint of Lewis

Washington Supreme Court · Feb 2, 2023

No. 99939-2 (consol. w/99941-4) (Gordon McCloud, J., dissenting) clearly linked to core Sixth Amendment issues of attorney competence and accountability. … The requirement to take the WLC is clearly connected to an attorney’s ability to practice competently in our state.

Fisher v. Schwabacher Hardware Co.

112 Wash. 240 · Washington Supreme Court · Aug 18, 1920

carried on like a partnership, by Julius Eedelsheimer and Benjamin Moyses, each owning an equal number of shares of its capital stock, and they two owning all of its stock except two shares held by a third person merely to qualify … of the salmon company, which resulted in a judgment entered December 2, 1915, against the salmon company, Moyses and the estate of Julius Eedelsheimer, in the principal sum of $5,000, but for some reason which does not clearly

Pacific Northwest Conference of the Free Methodist Church of North America v. Barlow

77 Wash. 2d 487 · Washington Supreme Court · Dec 31, 1969

However, the record shows clearly that the use, whether by the respondent or by others, was predominantly sectarian in character. … And if this exemption is valid, then what is to stop all other religious sects from establishing similar camps?

Swinomish Indian Tribal Community v. Department of Ecology

178 Wash. 2d 571 · Washington Supreme Court · Oct 3, 2013

Ecology determined the significant benefits clearly overrode the potential harm. … The dissent engages in a “factual analysis” intended to show that exempt well uses and rural public water supply systems qualify under a cost-benefit analysis for consideration under the overriding-considerations exception

Griffin v. Thurston County Board of Health

165 Wash. 2d 50 · Washington Supreme Court · Nov 20, 2008

Some of the setback measurements contain qualifying language. … The critical threshold inquiry is whether the provision in question establishes a requirement at all.

Washington State Labor Council v. Reed

149 Wash. 2d 48 · Washington Supreme Court · Apr 3, 2003

concurring) — I concur in the result, but write separately because I believe the majority has abdicated its constitutional duty to interpret the law, breached fundamental principles of separation of powers, and failed to establish … Courts are exclusively qualified to interpret the constitution. See generally Marbury, 5 U.S. at 176 . To keep the balance, judicial power is severely limited.

State v. Ross

152 Wash. 2d 220 · Washington Supreme Court · Aug 12, 2004

We have established that “illegal or erroneous sentences may be challenged for the first time on appeal.” Ford, 137 Wn.2d at 477 (citing State v. Moen, 129 Wn.2d 535, 543-48 , 919 P.2d 69 (1996); In re Pers. … There, the sentencing court had calculated Goodwin’s offender score as a 4 based, in part, on three juvenile convictions that had clearly “washed out.” Id. at 864-65 .

Mt. Hood Beverage Co. v. Constellation Brands, Inc.

149 Wash. 2d 98 · Washington Supreme Court · Feb 20, 2003

The three-tier system itself, established in chapter 66.24 RCW and chapter 66.28 RCW, is not challenged in this case. In 1984, the legislature passed RCW 19.126 to enhance the three-tier system. … We then carefully balance “whether the burden on interstate commerce clearly exceeds the local benefits.” Brown-Forman, 476 U.S. at 579 .

Mt. Hood Beverage Co. v. Constellation Brands, Inc.

63 P.3d 779 · Washington Supreme Court · Feb 20, 2003

We then carefully balance "whether the burden on interstate commerce clearly exceeds the local benefits." Brown-Forman, 476 U.S. at 579 , 106 S.Ct. 2080 . … It would be odd to say that the latter—here, the Twenty-first Amendment—does not immunize states from Commerce Clause scrutiny, but that the former does. Bainbridge, 311 F.3d at 1110-11.

Putman v. Wenatchee Valley Medical Center

216 P.3d 374 · Washington Supreme Court · Sep 17, 2009

Therefore, under the standard described above, medical malpractice suits do not qualify as special proceedings and are not exempt from the civil rules under CR 81(a). B. Does RCW 7.70.150 conflict with CR 8 and 11? … finding that RCW 7.70.150 violates the right of access to the courts is inconsistent with the principles established in other cases.