Case law

State v. Templeton

148 Wash. 2d 193 · Washington Supreme Court · Dec 19, 2002

Clearly then, the revised form did not satisfy the rules.” 125 Where Divisions One and Two part company on this issue is in determining whether the failure to satisfy the rule prejudiced these defendants. … RIGHT TO REFUSE THIS BREATH TEST; THAT IF YOU REFUSE, YOUR LICENSE, PERMIT, OR PRIVILEGE TO DRIVE WILL BE REVOKED OR DENIED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING; AND THAT YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO ADDITIONAL TESTS ADMINISTERED BY A QUALIFIED

Hearst Communications v. Seattle Times Co.

115 P.3d 262 · Washington Supreme Court · Jun 30, 2005

. §§ 1801-1804 . [1] The Newspaper Preservation Act creates a process by which parties to a JOA can gain limited antitrust immunity. Id. … A party invokes the loss operation clause by issuing a "loss notice," stating its intent to establish the "Newspaper Cessation Date ... at the earliest possible opportunity." CP at 102.

Ham, Yearsley & Ryrie v. Northern Pacific Railway Co.

107 Wash. 378 · Washington Supreme Court · Jun 4, 1919

In instruction number seven the respondent *384 insists that the trial court adhered to the rule which held to the market value for all purposes, and clearly, specially and unmistakably told the jury that, in their determination … All of these matters were denied by the appellants in their counter-affidavit, and it was averred that these witnesses were qualified, and called for the purpose of testifying, as witnesses, to the market value of the premises

Hearst Communications, Inc. v. Seattle Times Co.

154 Wash. 2d 493 · Washington Supreme Court · Jun 30, 2005

. §§ 1801-1804 . 1 The Newspaper Preservation Act creates a process by which parties to a JOA can gain limited antitrust immunity. Id. … A party invokes the loss operation clause by issuing a “loss notice,” stating its intent to establish the “Newspaper Cessation Date ... at the earliest possible opportunity.” CP at 102.

In the Matter of Personal Restraint of Powell

117 Wash. 2d 175 · Washington Supreme Court · Aug 1, 2004

Ct. 2532 ("a repealer of parole eligibility previously available to imprisoned offenders would clearly present [a] serious question under the ex post facto clause"), reh'g denied, 419 U.S. 1014 (1974); Devine v. … Petitioners also claim that this scheme violates the Washington privileges and immunities clause, Const, art. 1, § 12.

Gildon v. Simon Property Group, Inc.

145 P.3d 1196 · Washington Supreme Court · Oct 26, 2006

is a necessary and indispensable party, CR 19 "calls for determinations that are heavily influenced by the facts and circumstances of individual cases." 7 Wright & Miller § 1604, at 39. [13] The burden of proof *1203 for establishing … The changes clarify that the exhaustion requirement does not diminish the scope of a partner's liability or immunize a partner from suit when a plaintiff cannot or does not join the partnership.

Gildon v. Simon Property Group, Inc.

158 Wash. 2d 483 · Washington Supreme Court · Oct 26, 2006

necessary and indispensable party, CR 19 “calls for determinations that are heavily influenced by the facts and circumstances of individual cases.” 7 Wright, Miller & Kane, supra, § 1604, at 39. 13 The burden of proof for establishing … The changes clarify that the exhaustion requirement does not diminish the scope of a partner’s liability or immunize a partner from suit when a plaintiff cannot or does not join the partnership.

State Ex Rel. Starkey v. Alaska Airlines, Inc.

68 Wash. 2d 318 · Washington Supreme Court · Apr 7, 1966

That was clearly not a proper function for the Washington court — only the Delaware court should be allowed to decide what the Delaware legislature meant by the statutory term "chancellor." … Pacific Gamble Robinson Co., 21 Wn.2d 866 , 153 P.2d 686 , which the majority cite and attempt to distinguish, this court laid down a rule of law which is clearly applicable here.

Yelle v. Kramer

83 Wash. 2d 464 · Washington Supreme Court · Feb 22, 1974

prior to the adoption of amendment 20 in 1948, the Supreme Court held that the word "legislature," as used in the constitution must be deemed to include all branches or component parts of legislative power, which includes qualified … This is clearly a proposal to present to the people an opportunity to determine at the polls a rejection or approval of a section of a law passed by the legislature; clearly a referendum function.

State v. Schwab

103 Wash. 2d 542 · Washington Supreme Court · Jan 11, 1985

In making such request the Attorney General's office represented that it was "important that the Attorney General establish whether Residential Landlord-Tenant Act violations indeed violate the Consumer Protection Act" and … Although the Residential Landlord-Tenant Act of 1973 imposes upon the landlord the duty to keep the premises fit for human habitation, its remedial provisions are significantly qualified.

Natches & Cowyche Ditch Co. v. George Weikel

87 Wash. 224 · Washington Supreme Court · Sep 13, 1915

The air is somewhat corrupted by the most ordinary use; large manufacturing establishments affect it still more seriously; and some, by reason of their vicinity to a numerous population, become so offensive and destructive … Until the plaintiff can show an unreasonable use by the defendants in conveying waste waters into this creek, there is clearly, we think, no cause for an injunction.

State v. Brown

940 P.2d 546 · Washington Supreme Court · Aug 13, 1997

Mabry [193] to support his claim that death qualified juries are more prone to convict. … Clearly, Ms. Schnell's testimony was not necessary on the issue of premeditation. *602 Nor was the evidence necessary on the issue of consent.

State v. Williams

11 P.3d 714 · Washington Supreme Court · Oct 19, 2000

The Court therefore held that a defendant's testimony in a suppression hearing cannot be used as evidence to help establish guilt during the trial. … Such is clearly the predicate to consent required by Ferrier, as fully recognized by the trial court, which suppressed the fruits of the unconstitutional conduct.

Thompson v. Savidge

110 Wash. 486 · Washington Supreme Court · Mar 24, 1920

“The first part of the section, giving the right to select lands in lieu of such as were settled upon with a view to pre-emption or homestead, is clearly limited to settlements made before survey of lands in the field, and … “The rule which the Heydenfeldt case has established has, we understand, been uniformly followed in the land office.

Allen v. Dameron

Washington Supreme Court · Feb 2, 2017

Dameron IV eta/., No. 93056-2 vice principal, or agent" and a willful withholding of wages to establish liability). … The legislature clearly and expressly included within that statute the mental element of"[w]illful[ness] and ... intent to deprive." RCW 49.52.050(2).

Puget Investment Co. v. Wenck

36 Wash. 2d 817 · Washington Supreme Court · Jul 20, 1950

It was not definitely established whether this facility was in the build *822 ing at the time defendant took possession. … These obligations of the lessee are definitely established by paragraph (6) of the lease.

Woo v. Fireman's Fund Insurance

161 Wash. 2d 43 · Washington Supreme Court · Jul 26, 2007

Fireman’s responds that the allegations in Alberts’ complaint unambiguously establish that Woo’s practical joke was not connected to treating Alberts’ condition. … In any case, neither comports with our established rule regarding the duty to defend, and we decline to adopt Fireman’s reasoning.

Pacheco v. Mello

139 Wash. 566 · Washington Supreme Court · Jul 15, 1926

Soon after such adjudication, respondent, Farrell, was duly appointed and qualified as guardian of the estate of Mello, and was, for that reason, made a defendant in this action as such guardian. … None of these writings signed by him, as we read them, clearly expresses any trust obligation resting upon him with reference to the title to any land, and none of these writings describes any land either within themselves

John Does v. Seattle Police Dep't

Washington Supreme Court · Feb 13, 2025

The city did not identify any clearly applicable exemption requiring redaction of any information. … An injunction will not issue unless the proponent establishes both that an exemption applies and release would clearly not be in the public interest and would cause substantial and irreparable damage under RCW 42.56.540

Freedom Foundation v. Gregoire

178 Wash. 2d 686 · Washington Supreme Court · Oct 17, 2013

]making process to qualify for confidential treatment ..., the majority makes it possible for the governor to withhold documents on the basis of a privilege that is not applicable in the first place.” … Both descriptions show much more clearly how the documents relate to executive decision-making. The documents relate to the president’s exercise of his pardon power.