Case law

Ass'n of Wash. Spirits & Wine Distribs. v. Liquor Control Bd.

Washington Supreme Court · Jan 8, 2015

When we consider context, the Initiative clearly created several different licenses; each licensee operates under a unique classification with unique rights and attendant responsibilities. … The Association cannot establish that the law involves a privilege or immunity.

Cotten v. Wilson

27 Wash. 2d 314 · Washington Supreme Court · Mar 10, 1947

Clearly, the act segregates defense workers who rode to and from their places of employment in public carriers of the motor vehicle type. … The language of the court in that opinion is applicable to the situation presented here: “The aim and purpose of the special privileges and immunities provision of Art.

Moses v. Department of Social & Health Services

90 Wash. 2d 271 · Washington Supreme Court · Jul 6, 1978

Under the joint federal-state programs, qualifying families may purchase food stamps with a value that exceeds the purchase price. … Congress clearly did not want the CETA allowance to be used in a way which destroyed its value as a training incentive.

Wheeler School District No. 152 v. Hawley

18 Wash. 2d 37 · Washington Supreme Court · May 15, 1943

They assert that the act is unconstitutional in that (1) it grants special privileges and immunities in violation of Art. … However, it is clearly contemplated that its life shall be extended if the plan of reorganization has not been fully worked out in four years.

Clark v. Dwyer

56 Wash. 2d 425 · Washington Supreme Court · Jun 30, 1960

There is added to chapter 15.16 RCW a new section to read as follows: “The director when establishing standards of color requirements for red varieties and partial red' varieties of apples shall establish color standards … They do not challenge the constitutionality of the 1939 act establishing such grades.

Zarbell v. BK. OF AMERICA ETC. ASS'N

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

The appellant, in support of her theory that the respondent waived this immunity by asking for an immediate dismissal of the action, relies upon the case of Teater v. … 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.

Jacoby v. Grays Harbor Chair & Mfg. Co.

77 Wash. 2d 911 · Washington Supreme Court · Apr 30, 1970

In order to qualify under this section an employee must have “completed at least 10 years as a Participant under the Plan.” … This booklet clearly states the conditions under which a terminated employee may be entitled to a deferred (to age 65) pension.

Haberman v. Washington Public Power Supply System

109 Wash. 2d 107 · Washington Supreme Court · Feb 17, 1988

However, it is well established that futility is not established by mere approval or acquiescence by a corporation. Kaufman v. Safeguard Scientifics, Inc., 587 F. Supp. 486, 489 (E.D. Pa. 1984) ; Lewis v. … A Discretionary Immunity Discretionary immunity is a narrow court-created exception to the Legislature's abolition of sovereign immunity. Bender v.

Cummins v. Lewis County

156 Wash. 2d 844 · Washington Supreme Court · May 4, 2006

Properly, the public duty doctrine is neither a court created general grant of immunity nor a set of specific exceptions to some other existing immunity. … While the court did not use the term “public duty doctrine,” it clearly articulated its underlying principles.

Vance Lumber Co. v. King County

184 Wash. 402 · Washington Supreme Court · Nov 13, 1935

I of our state constitution, which forbids special privileges and immunities, and the fourteenth amendment to the Federal constitution, which is to the same effect. … It would seem that what has been said in discussing the first point raised is equally applicable here; namely, it is not established that King county’s ability to meet its obligations is in any degree lessened by this act

Quinault Indian Nation v. Imperium Terminal Services, LLC

187 Wash. 2d 460 · Washington Supreme Court · Jan 12, 2017

Respondents’ projects clearly fall within that broad policy. … This is clearly a transportation activity that “originate [s] or conclude [s] ” in Washington’s coastal waters. Id.

Ventenbergs v. City of Seattle

163 Wash. 2d 92 · Washington Supreme Court · Feb 21, 2008

entitled to contract with whomever it chose to exercise this power. 6 The Court of Appeals affirmed, reiterating that a city has broad discretion to take action under its police powers and that solid waste collection is clearly … See CP at 447, 989. f 19 Finally, the City determined to limit the number of contractors so that it could establish uniform delivery standards, while at the same time promoting competition. CP at 1617.

Connick v. City of Chehalis

53 Wash. 2d 288 · Washington Supreme Court · Dec 18, 1958

. *290 Appellant contends that, giving this clause its proper grammatical construction, the legislature granted fluctuating pensions to qualified pensioners. … established fixed retirement benefits.

Chadwick Farms Owners Ass'n v. FHC LLC

166 Wash. 2d 178 · Washington Supreme Court · May 14, 2009

If those claims are valid, FHC did not properly wind up its affairs—it clearly knew of the claims at the time it was canceled. … The legislature clearly knew the difference.

In re the Personal Restraint of Stanphill

134 Wash. 2d 165 · Washington Supreme Court · Jan 8, 1998

However, the SRA ranges do not guarantee release and pre-SRA offenders must still establish parolability. … Our analysis of the ex post facto clause in In re Powell clearly illustrates this point and is applicable to the case at bar.

Laborers Local Union No. 374 v. Felton Construction Co.

98 Wash. 2d 121 · Washington Supreme Court · Nov 24, 1982

Addressing a similar proprietary interest argument in Hicklin , the Court refused to establish an *130 exception under the privileges and immunities clause, stating: Rather than placing a statute completely beyond the Clause … By contrast, the Toomer/Hicklin test establishes a standard at least comparable to the intermediate *132 level of scrutiny, Massachusetts Coun. of Constr. Employers, Inc. v.

Matter of Stanphill

949 P.2d 365 · Washington Supreme Court · Jan 8, 1998

However, the SRA ranges do not guarantee release and pre-SRA offenders must still establish parolability. … Our analysis of the ex post facto clause in In re Powell clearly illustrates this point and is applicable to the case at bar.

McDowell v. AUSTIN COMPANY

105 Wash. 2d 48 · Washington Supreme Court · Dec 12, 1985

Parties are free to establish liability instead of negligence as the triggering mechanism of an indemnity contract. See, e.g., Continental Cas. Co. v. … The court held the indemnity clause at issue unenforceable because it was ambiguous in three respects: It failed to state expressly an intent (1) to deprive the indemnitor of his immunity as an employer under the Industrial

King County v. CENTRAL PUGET SOUND GROWTH

979 P.2d 374 · Washington Supreme Court · Jun 10, 1999

The County further argued that the UGA provisions in the CPPs were not internally inconsistent and clearly mandated that the Bear Creek area be designated a UGA. … It held that CPPs may be directive and that King County's CPPs clearly mandated that the Bear Creek area be designated urban.

Anderson v. O'BRIEN

84 Wash. 2d 64 · Washington Supreme Court · Jul 11, 1974

These attributes of sovereignty qualify the tribe as an entity with wholly public functions. … none may in law be afforded special privileges or immunities.