Case law

Matter of Personal Restraint of Lord

123 Wash. 2d 296 · Washington Supreme Court · Mar 10, 1994

Lord claims one of the jurors was 17 years old and therefore not qualified to act as a juror. … Clearly, despite Lord’s claim that no "conviction” exists, these documents prove there was an adjudication of guilt.

Port of Grays Harbor v. Citifor, Inc.

123 Wash. 2d 610 · Washington Supreme Court · Mar 17, 1994

The Port clearly abandoned the condemnation proceedings in this case. Thus, RCW 8.25.075 is applicable to a party who qualifies as a condemnee. … Any further delay beyond the deadline established by the Corps of Engineers would jeopardize the Port’s efforts to complete the Deeper Draft Project. Clerk’s Papers, at 376; see also Brief of Appellant, at 12.

In Re Marriage of Muhammad

108 P.3d 779 · Washington Supreme Court · Mar 24, 2005

The only work for which the Petitioner is qualified at this time is as a law enforcement *783 officer and he is currently unemployed. … There are very few people for whom half of $8,200 is a "minimal" amount, and given the total assets and liabilities at issue in this dissolution proceeding, Gilbert and Muhammad are clearly not among them.

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

State v. Korum

141 P.3d 13 · Washington Supreme Court · Aug 17, 2006

Adams, 870 F.2d 1140, 1145 (6th Cir.1989). ś 107 A defendant can establish prosecutorial vindictiveness in two ways. First, the defendant can establish actual vindictiveness. United States v. … Korum has not established actual vindictiveness. ś 108 Second, a defendant may establish a realistic likelihood of vindictiveness that gives rise to a rebuttable presumption of vindictiveness.

Schermer v. Department of Social & Health Services

161 Wash. 2d 927 · Washington Supreme Court · Oct 11, 2007

See RCW 26.33-.130(2) (“An order terminating the parent-child relationship divests the parent and the child of all legal rights, powers, privileges, immunities, duties, and obligations with respect to each other.”). … At this point, the record shows that DSHS offered only a door alarm and respite care, which Henry’s parents and treatment providers deemed clearly inadequate to make it safe for him to return home. ¶79 There is no question

State v. Gregory

147 P.3d 1201 · Washington Supreme Court · Dec 22, 2006

Yet while the determination of historical facts relevant to the establishment of probable cause is subject to the abuse of discretion standard, the legal determination of whether qualifying information as a whole amounts … While Silva clearly exercised his Fifth Amendment right to remain silent, Gregory does not establish that his refusal to be recorded or make a formal statement implicates the Fifth Amendment right where there was no testimony

Dumas v. Gagner

971 P.2d 17 · Washington Supreme Court · Feb 4, 1999

When the Port of Kennewick established the current port commission district boundaries in 1992, the western terminus of West 43rd Avenue was a turnaround at approximately the west boundary of Lot six. … However, this Court has stated the "general rule" that "election statutes are considered remedial and should be liberally construed." [45] In particular, statutes establishing qualifications for office are to be construed

Allan v. University of Washington

997 P.2d 360 · Washington Supreme Court · Apr 20, 2000

Perhaps the majority would here unwittingly overrule the standing portion of the Trades Council decision; but if that is its intent, it should say so clearly. As Mrs. … demonstrated by the fact that, without an express exemption, simple "statements" could otherwise be construed as rules. [2] The language of the "statements" exemption does not support the conclusion that by not expressly qualifying

In Re Dependency of Schermer

169 P.3d 452 · Washington Supreme Court · Oct 11, 2007

See RCW 26.33.130(2) ("An order terminating the parent-child relationship divests the parent and the child of all legal rights, powers, privileges, immunities, duties, and obligations with respect to each other"). … At this point, the records shows that DSHS offered only a door alarm and respite care, which Henry's parents and treatment providers deemed clearly inadequate to make it safe for him to return home. ¶ 79 There is no question

Miller v. City of Tacoma

979 P.2d 429 · Washington Supreme Court · Jul 1, 1999

Review of the findings is therefore limited to examining the record to establish whether there is substantial evidence to support each challenged finding. … RCW 42.30.110(1)(g) *441 does not appear to encompass positions like membership in the planning commission, much less clearly so.

Viking Properties, Inc. v. Holm

118 P.3d 322 · Washington Supreme Court · Aug 18, 2005

"Appurtenant" has a clear and long-established meaning: "annexed or belonging legally to some more important thing . . . incident to and passing in possession with real estate. . . ." … While the substantive due process claims asserted by Viking clearly have continued validity, see Mission Springs, Inc. v.

In re Bar Application of Stevens

Washington Supreme Court · Nov 3, 2022

By requiring the consideration of “other” conduct, APR 21(a)(14) clearly directs this court to consider conduct that is not already implicated by the preceding APR 21(a) factors. … Ferre is qualified, and we credit his testimony.

Nielson v. Spanaway General Medical Clinic

956 P.2d 312 · Washington Supreme Court · May 28, 1998

The judiciary exists to insure such rights, and the convenience of the judiciary is clearly subservient to this duty. … However, the Nielsons clearly challenged the constitutionality of the application of collateral estoppel in this case. Majority at 318. See also Pet. for Review at 11.

State v. Meneese

174 Wash. 2d 937 · Washington Supreme Court · Aug 2, 2012

police officer,” id., who cannot discipline students, eliminates the possibility that he is a school official who works with school authorities to achieve an environment that supports learning. f 40 First of all, whether one qualifies … Clearly, under T.L.O. the dean could have searched Meneese’s bag herself. Yet the majority finds something sinister in the district’s appointee, i.e., Fry, conducting the search in her office and in her presence.

McKown v. Simon Prop. Grp., Inc.

Washington Supreme Court · Mar 5, 2015

As for the second certified question, we answer no, as qualified by our discussion to this point. 5 While proving acts of similar violence is not the only way for a plaintiff to establish a duty as provided in the Restatement … The majority does not clearly answer this question. On the one hand, it says such evidence is not required.

Washington State Bar Ass'n v. Washington Ass'n of Realtors

41 Wash. 2d 697 · Washington Supreme Court · Dec 19, 1952

Defendant does not question, and no citation of authority is necessary to establish, the possession of this power by this court. … It was neither alleged nor proved that respondent represented himself as qualified to do work of a legal nature.

Estate of Jordan v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co.

120 Wash. 2d 490 · Washington Supreme Court · Jan 21, 1993

The statute allows the insurer to define who qualifies as an employee or officer; the statute does not allow the insurer to define what is a fraudulent or dishonest act. … Any benefits Tinsley received as a shareholder are clearly benefits "other than employee benefits".

York v. Wahkiakum School Dist. No. 200

178 P.3d 995 · Washington Supreme Court · Mar 13, 2008

The trial court found, however, "the policy clearly does not require disclosure of other medications in the first instance. … The state may enact reasonable regulations to protect the public health and public safety of school children, and compulsory immunization is a permissible exercise of the state's police power. Zucht v.

Milkey v. Cross

23 Wash. 2d 699 · Washington Supreme Court · Sep 27, 1945

Clearly it was the trial court’s view that Mrs. … Such is the rule of our own cases, and the rule established by the great weight of authority. [Citing cases.]”