Case law

Manor v. Nestle Food Co.

932 P.2d 628 · Washington Supreme Court · Mar 13, 1997

If Manor had been covered under the state fund he clearly would not be barred from a third party action as a matter of law. … There is no analogous provision in the IIA establishing legislative intent that a corporate parent is immune from a third party suit merely because its affiliated companies provide coverage through self-insurance.

State v. Reis

Washington Supreme Court · May 7, 2015

In this context, the amended MUCA clearly establishes a tiered 10 State v. … Instead, qualifying patients and designated providers are provided with an affirmative defense and RCW 69.51A.040 establishes the elements for raising that defense.

Miotke v. City of Spokane

101 Wash. 2d 307 · Washington Supreme Court · Mar 15, 1984

Spokane's sewer system was established in 1890, and has been expanded significantly since that time. … Plaintiffs clearly satisfy all three criteria identified in PUD 1 v.

State v. Shea

78 Wash. 342 · Washington Supreme Court · Feb 28, 1914

None of this evidence was controverted, and we think it clearly tended to establish the fact that the prosecuting witness paid this money on a promise of protection to be secured through the appellant’s relations with the … This evidence falls within the well established exception to the rule excluding evidence as to other criminal acts.

State v. Fabbri

98 Wash. 207 · Washington Supreme Court · Aug 29, 1917

It is argued in appellant’s behalf that the words “with intent to sell,” etc., re *209 fer to and qualify the words “manufacture, . . . any intoxicating liquor,” as well as the words “keep any intoxicating liquor.” … Those rights are best secured, in our government, by the observance, upon the part of all, of such regulations as are established by competent authority to promote the common good.

DeFunis v. Odegaard

82 Wash. 2d 11 · Washington Supreme Court · Mar 8, 1973

These “close cases,” — i.e., where the applicant was neither clearly outstanding nor clearly deficient — required the most effort of the committee. … Const, amend. 14, and the privileges and immunities clause of Const, art. 1, § 12, have the same import, and we apply them as one. Markham Adv. Co. v.

Gossett v. Farmers Insurance

133 Wash. 2d 954 · Washington Supreme Court · Dec 24, 1997

They clearly did not purchase the property. Instead, they assigned "all interest” in their purchase and sale agreement to Trusty Deed. CP at 86. … Corporations are clearly entitled to the same privileges and immunities as individual persons, but this does not explain why any enhanced protection should be considered under the state constitution.

City of Seattle v. Cottin

144 Wash. 572 · Washington Supreme Court · Aug 9, 1927

remove such person to such hospital, *574 sanitarium, separate house, or such place as has been designated by the commissioner of health, or as may be by law or ordinance provided therefor, it shall be his duty to forthwith establish … Appellant contends that, having been legally qualified to practice a certain system of healing, under cer *576 tain statutes relating thereto, he is entitled to be included within the class known as physicians and within

Buchanan v. Simplot Feeders LP

952 P.2d 610 · Washington Supreme Court · Mar 19, 1998

This condition also suggests an established farm may not be able to institute a new or radically expanded "activity" and maintain nuisance immunity, because the language of the statute focuses on agricultural activity that … has been established prior to the urban encroachment.

Lowy v. PeaceHealth

174 Wash. 2d 769 · Washington Supreme Court · Jun 21, 2012

Lowy responds that “review” clearly refers to external review, and the statute does not prohibit the hospital from examining its own records. … ] are privileged and immune from discovery.” CP at 18. The hospital was incorrect.

Hauber v. Yakima County

56 P.3d 559 · Washington Supreme Court · Oct 31, 2002

The legislature clearly intended to forge a compromise similar to the one in the Industrial Insurance Act, Title 51 RCW. … The Legislature clearly intended for such agreements to be formal and specific. See also WAC 118-30-060 (detailing requirements for emergency management plans and mutual aid plans).

San Juan County v. No New Gas Tax

157 P.3d 831 · Washington Supreme Court · Apr 26, 2007

The prosecutors asserted that Wilbur and Carlson are "officers and agents" of NNGT because "[t]hey have solicited money and other resources to qualify Initiative 912 for the ballot." CP at 343. … Allen, 466 U.S. 522, 543 , 104 S.Ct. 1970 , 80 L.Ed.2d 565 (1984), superseded by statute as to judicial immunity as stated in Kampfer v. Scullin, 989 F.Supp. 194 (N.D.N.Y.1997)).

State v. Johnson

77 Wash. 2d 423 · Washington Supreme Court · Dec 24, 1969

They have dismissed the cases, but I want you to understand clearly in deciding whether you wish to waive, your privilege against self incrimination that under the law they cannot grant you immunity, *432 neither can the … Before he took the stand, the court clearly advised him that neither the prosecuting attorney nor the court had the legal power to grant him immunity from prosecution, and that the state was not barred from prosecuting him

Zarbell v. Bank of America National Trust & Savings Ass'n

52 Wash. 2d 549 · Washington Supreme Court · Jul 3, 1958

(Italics ours.) *552 ’ In the cáse at bár, it -is quite obvious that the respondent, in its motion, asserted the immunity provided by Congress in 12 U. S. C. … Clearly, the defendant therein, by asking for affirmative relief after his motion to dismiss was denied, waived his special appearance and any right to a dismissal for lack of proper service of summons.

State Ex Rel. Raines v. City of Seattle

134 Wash. 360 · Washington Supreme Court · May 8, 1925

By the provisions of § 6 of the amendments, these places were to be filled from the qualified civil service. … Clearly, under that provision of § 10, of art. XI, of the constitution, the state delegated to cities such as Seattle plenary power to adopt a local constitution or charter for its local government.

Buchanan v. Simplot Feeders Ltd. Partnership

134 Wash. 2d 673 · Washington Supreme Court · Mar 19, 1998

This condition also suggests an established farm may not be able to institute a new or radically expanded “activity” and maintain nuisance immunity, because the language of the statute focuses on agricultural activity that … has been established prior to the urban encroachment.

Kim v. Lakeside Adult Family Home

185 Wash. 2d 532 · Washington Supreme Court · May 12, 2016

The court reasoned, “ A grant of immunity from liability clearly implies that civil liability can exist in the first place.’” Beggs, 171 Wn.2d at 78 (quoting Jane Doe v. … The Hague Convention also establishes alternative methods of service.

Winkenwerder v. City of Yakima

52 Wash. 2d 617 · Washington Supreme Court · Jul 24, 1958

The burden rests upon the party who challenges an ordinance to establish clearly its invalidity; Ibid. .It is-, well to keep in mind the words of Justice Holmes in Noble State Bank v. Haskell (1910), 219 U. … The cases cited and relied on by respondent clearly involve unreasonable encroachment.

McAvoy v. Weber

198 Wash. 370 · Washington Supreme Court · Mar 24, 1939

The right to garnish exists only when clearly sanctioned by the statutory law. 28 C. J. 25, § 13. Rem. Rev. Stat., § 680 [P. … The authorities are uniform in establishing the law to be that such a corporation is a private corporation.”

Martin v. Dep't of Corrections

Washington Supreme Court · May 26, 2022

Sovereign immunity, established under Washington’s constitution in article II, section 26, recognized there was no right to sue the State at common law. … Analyzing a different statute—former RCW 7.70.100 (2006), which established a 90-day notice period for medical malpractice claims—McDevitt’s lead opinion held that sovereign immunity allowed the legislature