Case law

Edgar v. State

92 Wash. 2d 217 · Washington Supreme Court · May 24, 1979

Further provisions, all found in the then current Air Force Manual, declared that failure to qualify for the program or remain qualified should not be used as a ground for punitive action, and the regulations with respect … The question before the court in Quern, as Justice Brennan's dissent quite clearly points out, was whether the word "person" as used in this statute included states.

O'CONNELL v. Conte

76 Wash. 2d 280 · Washington Supreme Court · Jun 19, 1969

We therefore hold that these provisions in the 1967 act are reasonable classifications of persons and estates and are not in violation of the equal privileges and immunities provision of article 1, section 12 of the state … We feel that the director of an institution in the light of his expertise would be the person most qualified to make the determination required by this section of the act.

Brown v. State

924 P.2d 908 · Washington Supreme Court · Oct 17, 1996

Burlington N., Inc., 105 Wash.2d 567 , 716 P.2d 855 (1986) (deed in statutory form grants easement where additional language in the deed expressly and clearly limits or qualifies the interest granted); Veach v. … Rather than identifying the purpose of the conveyances, we must conduct a deed-by-deed analysis to ascertain whether the parties clearly and expressly limited or qualified the interest granted, considering the express language

Roscoe v. City of Everett

136 Wash. 295 · Washington Supreme Court · Oct 13, 1925

plant rather than to the matter of precautions necessary to be taken to secure immunity from pollution. … But the question more clearly is whether, considering the necessarily close relationship between the city health department and the purity of water furnished by the city to its users, it can be found that notice reached the

Department of Game v. Puyallup Tribe, Inc.

80 Wash. 2d 561 · Washington Supreme Court · May 4, 1972

The state has clearly met that test, at least to the extent that it has established that continued use by the defendants of their drift nets and set nets would result in the nearly complete destruction of the anadromous fish … In other words, the “right” to fish outside the reservation was a treaty “right” that could not be qualified or conditioned by the State.

Washington State Commercial Passenger Fishing Vessel Ass'n v. Tollefson

89 Wash. 2d 276 · Washington Supreme Court · Nov 23, 1977

The decision clearly established over 70 years ago that treaty Indians possess rights distinct from those of ordinary citizens. … Puyallup II clearly establishes that Indians fishing pursuant to a treaty possess special rights and constitute a distinct class of fishermen.

E. I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co. v. State

44 Wash. 2d 339 · Washington Supreme Court · Mar 4, 1954

(2) If Du Pont was an independent contractor rather than an agent, do these contract provisions nevertheless establish a special relationship between the contractor and the government, whereby the contractor became immune … But, as established by those decisions, their function was not to establish tax immunity, and they did not effectuate that result.

Michaels v. CH2M Hill, Inc.

257 P.3d 532 · Washington Supreme Court · May 26, 2011

Clearly, if no construction was occurring on the campus, the immunity provisions of RCW 51.24.035 would not be at issue. CH2M's contract with the city contemplated at least two main activities. … The immunity statute at issue addresses both historical bases for liability; it protects design professionals from general liability for work site safety (unless assumed by contract) but clearly recognizes common law liability

State v. Unga

196 P.3d 645 · Washington Supreme Court · Nov 26, 2008

Unga was clearly aware that he was being questioned as a suspect in the commission of criminal activity. ¶ 29 The questioning was of short duration, lasting only 30 minutes. … Broadaway, 133 Wash.2d 118, 132 , 942 P.2d 363 (1997) (establishing the "totality of the circumstances" and stating, "[t]he court must determine whether there is a causal relationship between the promise and the confession

In re Salary of Superior Court Judges

82 Wash. 623 · Washington Supreme Court · Dec 17, 1914

The'fifth section provides that “There shall be in each of the organized counties of this state a superior court, for which at least one judge shall be elected by the qualified electors of the county at the general state … A section of the act provided, “that the salaries of the judges and chancellors of the several courts established by this act shall be the same as for the circuit judges and chancellors as established by law, each to be paid

State v. Nichols

28 Wash. 628 · Washington Supreme Court · Jun 16, 1902

Certainly, in the view of authority and well recognized principles, this is no arbitrary exception; and, unless clearly so-, it is not within the province of the judiciary to inquire further into the policy of the statute … The legislature may also deem it desirable to' prescribe peculiar rules for the several occupations, and to establish distinctions in the rights, obligations, duties, and capacities of citizens.

Ducote v. DSHS

222 P.3d 785 · Washington Supreme Court · Dec 17, 2009

Zellmer, 164 Wash.2d 147, 169 , 188 P.3d 497 (2008), we recently held the parental immunity doctrine applied to stepparents standing in loco parentis. … investigation of a stepparent who is integrated into the child's life and home will be just as disruptive to the child and the family as a negligent investigation of a parent whose legal rights have already been formally established

Kottler v. State

963 P.2d 834 · Washington Supreme Court · Sep 24, 1998

To qualify for this exception the original party must be fault-free and both parties to the contribution action must have been defendants against whom judgment was entered in the underlying action. … Thus, the general principle in Washington established by the Legislature in 1981 is joint and several liability.

Hoflin v. City of Ocean Shores

121 Wash. 2d 113 · Washington Supreme Court · Mar 11, 1993

It cites Hocker for the principle of immunity for a public officer who violates the constitutional rights of others, unless the officer acts with malicious intent, where the particular right violated was not clearly established … The City argues that the constitutional right it may have violated was not clearly established because there is a split of authority on the question whether a foreign felony conviction is sufficient to precipitate application

Manor v. Nestle Food Co.

131 Wash. 2d 439 · Washington Supreme Court · Mar 13, 1997

ANALYSIS An employer may comply with the requirements of the IIA either by insuring with the State Industrial Insurance Fund or qualifying as a self-insurer under Title 51 RCW. … While this is a regulation and not a statute, "[i]t has been established in a variety of contexts that properly promulgated, substantive agency regulations have the 'force and effect of law.’ ” Chrysler Corp. v.

Department of Game v. Puyallup Tribe, Inc.

70 Wash. 2d 245 · Washington Supreme Court · Jan 12, 1967

This was clearly recognized in United States v. … The state has clearly met that test, at least to the extent that it has established that continued use by the defendants of their drift nets and set nets would result in the nearly complete destruction of the anadromous fish

Wash. State Major League Baseball Stadium Pfd v. Huber, Hunt & Nichols-Kiewit Const. Co.

202 P.3d 924 · Washington Supreme Court · Mar 5, 2009

Thus, because community colleges were established through enabling rather than mandatory acts, the superior court held Northampton did not qualify under the nullum tempus doctrine to an exemption from the statute of limitations … It therefore denied the school district's claim to governmental immunity.

King v. City of Seattle

84 Wash. 2d 239 · Washington Supreme Court · Aug 15, 1974

For 70 years prior to this the Corps had required permits only in navigable waters beyond the established harbor or pierhead lines. … The justification for this immunity, as stated by Judge Learned Hand in Gregoire v.

INDOOR BILLBOARD WASHINGTON, INC. v. Integra Telecom of Washington, Inc.

170 P.3d 10 · Washington Supreme Court · Oct 18, 2007

as a PICC. ¶ 29 We conclude that because Integra is a CTC, and cannot claim immunity from CPA claims under RCW 19.86.170, and Indoor Billboard clearly alleged a valid claim under chapter 19.86 RCW, the trial court had subject … What is required to establish causation? ¶ 44 This court has yet to clearly define the proof required to establish causation in a *20 CPA claim.

MacIas v. Department of Labor & Industries

100 Wash. 2d 263 · Washington Supreme Court · Oct 5, 1983

Appellants' evidence does establish, however, a substantial disparate impact upon a racial minority. … The confines of that right have not been clearly defined, however. Shapiro involved a 1-year waiting requirement for welfare benefits.