Case law

In re Pers. Restraint of Khan

Washington Supreme Court · Nov 25, 2015

Under the current rules, a personal restraint petition will be dismissed "if it is clearly frivolous or clearly barred by RCW 10.73.090 or [RAP] 16.4(d)." RAP 16.8.1(b); RAP 16.11(b). … In addition, I<han was able to communicate his version of events and clearly deny the allegations against him. See id. at 344-45.

State v. Coria

120 Wash. 2d 156 · Washington Supreme Court · Nov 12, 1992

Since stops added after the master map is sent to SPI are not added to that ■map, such stops will not qualify as school bus route stops for purposes of the penalty enhancement. RCW 69.50-.435(f)(3). … This argument fails to establish an equal protection viola *175 tion. "It is well established that a showing of discriminatory intent or purpose is required to establish a valid equal protection claim." United States v.

Spokane County v. State

136 Wash. 2d 644 · Washington Supreme Court · Oct 22, 1998

Elected prosecutors, however, are clearly elected for a specified term of office. … The similarities between the tenure of an elected prosecutor and the deputy prosecutor appointed by the elected prosecutor establish why the above arguments fail.

State v. Smails

63 Wash. 172 · Washington Supreme Court · Apr 17, 1911

There was not, it is true, the direct testimony of two witnesses to the perjury, but there was the direct testimony of one witness, and corroborating circumstances established by independent evidence of such a character “ … as clearly to turn the scale and overcome the oath of the defendant and the legal presumption of his innocence,” if the jury believed the evidence.

Huntworth v. Tanner

87 Wash. 670 · Washington Supreme Court · Nov 6, 1915

purpose of the act was to protect laborers and workers only as distinguished from professional men and others, and that the terms and history of the law concur to sustain a judicial declaration that the words “any person” qualify … Clearly it would not, for murder is a crime by all law, human and divine. It is malwn m se.

Myrick v. Board of Pierce County Commissioners

102 Wash. 2d 698 · Washington Supreme Court · Sep 21, 1984

(c) An ordinance to be void for unreasonableness must be clearly and plainly unreasonable. (d) The burden of establishing the invalidity of an ordinance rests heavily upon the party challenging its constitutionality. … On the other hand, other conduct is clearly within or outside the statute; for example, nudity is clearly barred and the wearing of a nurse-type uniform is clearly permitted.

State Ex Rel. Namer Investment Corp. v. Williams

73 Wash. 2d 1 · Washington Supreme Court · Jan 5, 1968

The lessee, in addition to. occupancy, is given an option to purchase the property during *3 this term for an established price of $528,000. … Section .010 clearly provides that such transactions are amenable to the tax. Section .030 specifies that the basis for the tax is the “selling price” as defined.

State v. Lord

161 Wash. 2d 276 · Washington Supreme Court · Aug 30, 2007

jurisdiction of federal courts to grant habeas relief, mandating that such relief shall not be available unless the State court decision “resulted in a decision that was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly … established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States.” 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (d)(1).

State v. Clarke

134 P.3d 188 · Washington Supreme Court · May 11, 2006

exceptional sentence as a matter of law, or (3) under an abuse of discretion standard, the exceptional sentence is clearly too excessive or clearly too lenient. *195 Clarke, 124 Wash. … (Reviser's note omitted). [3] The dissent fails to provide any support for its assertion that, in addition to Clarke's life sentence, Clarke's minimum term also qualifies as the "relevant statutory maximum " contemplated

New Tacoma Parking Corp. v. Johnston

85 Wash. 2d 707 · Washington Supreme Court · Aug 7, 1975

The articles of incorporation clearly indicate that the sole purpose for forming the corporation was to assist the City in qualifying for the receipt of the above described federal funds. … Furthermore, all parking rates and changes pertaining thereto, as well as all regulations and restrictions affecting the operation of the garages, were fixed, established and maintained by the City.

State v. Kirkman

159 Wash. 2d 918 · Washington Supreme Court · Apr 5, 2007

Stirling’s testimony as “clearly” an improper opinion implying Kirkman’s guilt. Dr. … After establishing that there was no physical evidence of sexual contact, the State asked Dr.

Schultheis v. Nash

27 Wash. 250 · Washington Supreme Court · Jan 9, 1902

Martha Schultheis was appointed general guardian of her infant son, Arthur Kornetsky, hy the superior court of Lincoln county, and qualified as such guardian. … Dormitzer.” *253 Thereafter Nash & Nash brought an action against the estate of Rudolph Gorkow, deceased, which was conducted through the superior and supreme courts, and the rights of said minor in said estate were established

State v. Copeland

130 Wash. 2d 244 · Washington Supreme Court · Sep 19, 1996

"If there is a significant dispute between qualified experts as to the validity of scientific evidence, it may not be admitted.” Id. at 887 . … Other testimony by Henry was clearly in response to new matters.

State v. Lewis

Washington Supreme Court · Jul 17, 2025

To limit judicial discretion, the SRA establishes standard sentencing ranges based on the seriousness of the crime and the offender score of the defendant. RCW 9.94A.010; 9.94A.510-.533. … Morley to determine whether courts-martial qualified as convictions for the purpose of the offender score, we treated the offender score as though it included all convictions within the definition of “criminal history,

Grayson v. Curtis Publishing Co.

72 Wash. 2d 999 · Washington Supreme Court · Dec 30, 1967

In addition, Curtis pleaded the defenses of substantial truth, fair comment, qualified privilege, good faith, and the absolute protection of the First Amendment as guaranteeing freedom of the press in the absence of malicious … abrupt departure from existing rules of libel, would be applicable to public officials only, that is, only to persons holding what could fairly be called a public office, who, possibly through their office, enjoyed certain immunities

Washington Recorder Publishing Co. v. Ernst

199 Wash. 176 · Washington Supreme Court · May 24, 1939

I will also deliver free of charge complimentries and a reasonable number of sample copies of The Daily Olympian. “ (11) It is clearly understood that I am not an employe of The Daily Olympian. … (iii), in which subdivision there is nothing to disclose that the individual must sell products of, or perform service for, third persons in order to qualify as an independent contractor.

Ketcham v. King County Medical Service Corp.

81 Wash. 2d 565 · Washington Supreme Court · Nov 16, 1972

Decker, 52 Wn.2d 456, 464-65 , 326 P.2d 332 (1958), this court established the relation of U.S. … The new act is an addition to an already established area of regulated public activity.

Lindberg v. Kitsap County

133 Wash. 2d 729 · Washington Supreme Court · Nov 26, 1997

The use of the documents for that purpose is a reasonable "fair use” qualifying as an exception to the exclusive right of the copyright owner of the materials. … There is no evidence in the record to clearly establish a claim of copyright, but all parties and the courts assumed its existence. Superior Court Civil Rules (CR) 12(b)(7) and 19. 631 F.2d 824 (D.C.

INTER. ASS'N OF FIRE. v. Spokane Airports

45 P.3d 186 · Washington Supreme Court · Apr 25, 2002

The first two criteria are easily established. … In Bakenhus , the public employee's pension was established by state statutes.

Northern Pacific Railroad v. O'Brien

1 Wash. 599 · Washington Supreme Court · Mar 7, 1889

The evidence, moreover, clearly Shows that the flat car was designed for the laborers to ride on to and from their work, and that the caboose was reserved for the use of the train men. … In this case, as we have seen, the facts which are alleged to constitute the negligence were established by undisputed evidence.