Case law

Heggen v. City of Seattle

47 Wash. 2d 576 · Washington Supreme Court · Oct 13, 1955

Well, it is — I will have to qualify that to some extent in that the crack could develop anywhere. It might be visible. It might not. … Instruction No. 15, coming between them, when read in context was clearly intended to refer to the same situation, and not to the following bus.

Ramsdell v. North River School District No. 200

104 Wash. 2d 264 · Washington Supreme Court · Aug 8, 1985

To qualify for attending Cosmopolis schools, the children resided with their uncle, a Cosmopolis resident, during the week and returned home for the weekends. On August 11, 1982, Mr. and Mrs. … To do this we apply the "clearly erroneous" standard of review. Renton Educ. Ass'n v. Public Empl. Relations Comm’n, 101 Wn.2d 435, 440-41 , 680 P.2d 40 (1984) (citing RCW 34.04.130(6)(e) and Franklin Cy.

State v. Mays

65 Wash. 2d 58 · Washington Supreme Court · Oct 8, 1964

First, the granting or denial of a continuance, a recess, or a postponement rests in the sound discretion of the trial court, and error cannot be predicated thereon unless the trial court clearly abuses its discretion. … Any qualified expert in the field of psychiatry could have been called by appellant for this purpose on surrebuttal.

State ex rel. Murphy v. Coleman

71 Wash. 15 · Washington Supreme Court · Nov 9, 1912

It clearly appears from them both, that Allen was employed *21 as engineer and representative of the city; that he was in charge of the work during its progress and until its alleged completion; that he had the right to require … These and many other conditions incorporated in the contract, the execution of which is admitted,, establish the fact that the engineer, as the authorized representative of the city, was with its approval in full and complete

State v. 119 Vote No! Committee

135 Wash. 2d 618 · Washington Supreme Court · Jun 11, 1998

Calculated falsehood falls into that class of utterances which “are no essential part of any exposition of ideas, and are of such slight social value as a step to truth that any benefit that may be derived from them is clearly … The Oregon standard is a very difficult one to establish, but still provides that factually false statements may be actionable.

Godefroy v. Reilly

146 Wash. 257 · Washington Supreme Court · Jan 3, 1928

as an expert to testify as to the market values, and affirmatively disclosed that he could have no such knowledge as would qualify him to testify on that question. … Business Property Security Co., 87 Wash. 627 , 152 Pac. 334 , was another case where a depart *271 ment of the concern’s business was clearly the repair of buildings, which was one of the occupations included in the act.

City of Fircrest v. Jensen

143 P.3d 776 · Washington Supreme Court · Oct 5, 2006

This rule is well established. … The appellant's argument is without merit. ¶ 23 The foundational requirements to establish the admissibility of breath tests were first established in Baker .

State v. Superior Court

77 Wash. 593 · Washington Supreme Court · Jan 28, 1914

It is also provided that, if a general indebtedness is to be incurred in the acquisition of the utility so provided for, the terms of such indebtedness shall likewise be submitted to the qualified voters at such election … condemnation of “all such franchises or operating rights if any, privileges, easements, and other private rights or interests therein, if any, save as set forth in section 2 hereof” of the railways necessary to be taken for the establishment

St. Joseph Hospital & Health Care Center v. Department of Health

125 Wash. 2d 733 · Washington Supreme Court · Jan 26, 1995

To qualify as "aggrieved or adversely affected”, a person must satisfy three conditions: (1) The agency action has prejudiced or is likely to prejudice that person; (2) That person’s asserted interests are among those that … While the Legislature clearly wanted to control health care costs to the public, equally clear is its intention to accomplish that control by limiting competition within the health care industry.

Peterson v. Hagan

56 Wash. 2d 48 · Washington Supreme Court · Apr 14, 1960

Instead, it immunized employers covered by the federal act from state regulation and thus denied to small employers the equal protection of the laws. … Very clearly, the Federal Act could only be permissive — never mandatory.

In re Det. of Marcum

Washington Supreme Court · Aug 3, 2017

The "higher management setting" referenced in the above passage clearly refers to the Special Commitment Center, at which Marcum is now detained. … Yet this trial for unconditional release stems entirely from the fact that Marcum may qualify for conditional release to an LRA.

State v. Roberts

14 P.3d 713 · Washington Supreme Court · Feb 2, 2001

of an establishment where he was known. … This rule has been applied when the evidence clearly establishes that the murder was committed in the course of a felony that would serve as a predicate for a charge of felony murder in the first degree.

In re Termination of Parental Rights to M.A.S.C.

197 Wash. 2d 685 · Washington Supreme Court · May 20, 2021

[J.C.] shall explore and utilize options for assistance through DDD and SSI as qualified 2. … In this case, DCYF suggests, but does not explicitly argue, that further efforts would have been futile, and the record does not establish futility.

Vance v. Ingram

16 Wash. 2d 399 · Washington Supreme Court · Feb 1, 1943

Nor has it been conclusively established that the building did cost less than eighteen thousand dollars. … We are of the opinion that the option agreement clearly obligated appellant to pay nine thousand dollars in order to exercise her option.

Navlet v. Port of Seattle

194 P.3d 221 · Washington Supreme Court · Oct 16, 2008

And in Skinner, 188 F.3d at 141 , as noted the court concluded that phrases "`will continue'" and "`shall remain'" did not clearly and expressly indicate vesting since there was no durational language to qualify the phrases … [The] retirees' eligibility for benefits was qualified because it was subject to [the employer's] reserved right to terminate the plan under which the benefits were provided.

State ex rel. Reed v. Jones

23 L.R.A. 340 · Washington Supreme Court · Jun 5, 1893

Such consequences would *473 be a large price to pay for immunity from the possible abuse of authority by the high officers who are, as we think, charged with the duty of certifying to the public the fact that a statute has … Starne, 35 Ill. 136 , seems to clearly indicate that he regretted that a different rule had not been adopted by the courts of that state.

Rekhter v. Department of Social & Health Services

180 Wash. 2d 102 · Washington Supreme Court · Apr 3, 2014

Pillsbury Non-Qualified Pension Plan, 458 F.3d 748 (8th Cir. 2006), is misplaced. … DSHS’s timely notice of appeal clearly encompassed the trial court’s ruling on the client class.

State v. Hammond

121 Wash. 2d 787 · Washington Supreme Court · Jul 8, 1993

The former refers to a trial court proceeding after the defendant has deliberately and clearly refused to be present. See, e.g., Wilson v. Harris, 595 F.2d 101, 103 (2d Cir. 1979). … RCW 9.94A-.370(2) prohibits facts establishing the elements of an additional crime from being used to deviate from the presumptive range, subject to exceptions which are inapplicable here.

In Re the Determination of the Rights Ex Rel. the Waters of Sinlahekin Creek

162 Wash. 635 · Washington Supreme Court · May 15, 1931

The lands of the reclamation district were decreed to be in class 15, and it was accordingly awarded right in the waters of Sinlahekin creek to the extent of 200 cubic feet per second for 10,000 acres of land, qualified as … We think the decree has worked as nearly exact justice as it is possible under the much involved, and, in *644 many particulars, not in this record clearly proven, facts.

Westerman v. Cary

125 Wash. 2d 277 · Washington Supreme Court · Apr 28, 1995

See Petition for Writs of Mandate and Prohibition and Motion for an Order Establishing a Bond Schedule for Non-Warrant Custodial Arrests, Case No. 93 2 01896-1. … The language of these states’ provisions is more supportive of Westerman’s position that the right to bail is triggered by charging because it focuses more clearly on the offense itself: "Offences (sic), except murder, and