Case law

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

Sherman v. State

905 P.2d 355 · Washington Supreme Court · Nov 16, 1995

Given that the memorandum clearly *371 articulated that AAG Milam was acting as counsel for the University, even if Dr. … To establish a violation of the Act, the plaintiff must make a prima facie showing that: (1) he or she is a "handicapped individual" under the Act; (2) he or she is "otherwise qualified" for the position sought; (3) he or

Campbell v. State, Department of Social and Health Services

150 Wash. 2d 881 · Washington Supreme Court · Jan 29, 2004

The statute clearly does not apply to medical conditions, here in particular orthopedic conditions, that do not involve cognitive or intellectual impairment like that of mental retardation. … Second, the claimant has not established justifiable reliance.

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.

State v. Smith

117 Wash. 2d 263 · Washington Supreme Court · Aug 15, 1991

where the statute in question does not directly implicate physical liberty. [38] [11] Another difficulty with the juvenile defendant's attempt to trigger strict or even heightened scrutiny is the fact that Washington cases clearly … In Freeland , the court reached the issue it did not address in Clark , that is, whether a prosecutor's use of the two charging procedures "adheres to sufficiently consistent standards" in order to establish probable cause

Lakehaven Water & Sewer Dist. v. City of Federal Way

Washington Supreme Court · Jun 18, 2020

The governmental/proprietary distinction is integral to the governmental immunity doctrine and is firmly established in this court’s jurisprudence. … This rule is strongly established in our cases as a basic principle of government.

TS v. Boy Scouts of America

157 Wash. 2d 416 · Washington Supreme Court · Jul 27, 2006

On the other hand, the majority's recognition of a First Amendment qualified privilege against discovery requires much more judicial footwork: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting … Further, we declared over 25 years ago that article I, section 7 "clearly recognizes an individual's right to privacy with no express limitations." State v.

General Electric Co. v. State

42 Wash. 2d 411 · Washington Supreme Court · Apr 14, 1953

The corporation is in all respects qualified to do business within the state of Washington. … The tax immunity is established by § 9(b) as of the effective date of the atomic energy act.

Petersen v. State

100 Wash. 2d 421 · Washington Supreme Court · Oct 20, 1983

If these preliminary questions can be clearly and unequivocally answered in the affirmative, then the challenged act, omission, or decision can, with a reasonable degree of assurance, be classified as a discretionary governmental … It also claims that the testimony of other psychiatrists must be presented to establish what standard of care the professional community would require.

In re the Marriage of King

162 Wash. 2d 378 · Washington Supreme Court · Dec 6, 2007

The cases establishing a right to counsel mention and rely on the fact that the full resources of the State are brought to bear in termination and dependency proceedings. … In addition, Snohomish County Legal Services determined that she qualified for referral to pro bono counsel. CP at 56-59. As to her indigency, the trial court entered no findings on the question. Mr.

Campbell v. City of Bellevue

85 Wash. 2d 1 · Washington Supreme Court · Jan 9, 1975

We cannot agree with the City that ordinance No. 163 (§ 16.32.120) affords immunity under the circumstances of this case. … in which the accident occurred, but also in all other like establishments.”

Whatcom County v. Brisbane

125 Wash. 2d 345 · Washington Supreme Court · Dec 8, 1994

The ordinance is 145 pages long and clearly establishes new guidelines for evaluating and regulating proposed development in and around critical areas in Whatcom County. … While highly beneficial, the planned development of critical environmental areas does not qualify as emergency legislation.

Washington-Oregon Shippers Cooperative Ass'n v. Schumacher

59 Wash. 2d 159 · Washington Supreme Court · Dec 14, 1961

WOSCA qualifies for an exemption under 49 U. S. C. § 1002 (c), and, there *162 fore, is not subject to regulation by the Interstate Commerce Commission as a freight forwarder. … The members could arrange their transactions individually and enjoy the tax immunities of the commerce clause..

Woodson v. State

95 Wash. 2d 257 · Washington Supreme Court · Dec 31, 1980

That case clearly demonstrated the court's understanding that osteopathy included neither the practice of surgery nor the prescribing or administering of drugs. … On the other hand, when it declares accredited schools shall be those that may thereafter be established by some private authority, it is clearly an unconstitutional delegation of legislative power.

Evangelical United Brethren Church v. State

67 Wash. 2d 246 · Washington Supreme Court · Nov 4, 1965

in tort goes far beyond the original invention and elaboration of the immunity doctrine. … Establishing guidelines for its application, however, is another matter, particularly in the area involving executive or administrative discretion. (Italics mine.)

Cornelius v. Department of Ecology

182 Wash. 2d 574 · Washington Supreme Court · Feb 12, 2015

We will overturn an agency’s factual findings only if they are clearly erroneous. Id. at 594 . … We apply the “clearly erroneous” standard of review to an agency’s DNS. Nor. Hill Pres. & Prot. Ass’n v.

United States v. Hoffman

116 P.3d 999 · Washington Supreme Court · Jul 28, 2005

summary judgment that the CPA's provisions violate the United States Constitution's supremacy clause (article VI, clause 2) and commerce clause (article I, section 8, clause 3), and extend beyond any waiver of sovereign immunity … As the phrase "and other discarded material" suggests, every material that qualifies as "solid waste" must be in some way "discarded."

Jain v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance

130 Wash. 2d 688 · Washington Supreme Court · Nov 27, 1996

By blindly applying the Bradbury rule, the majority ignores both United States Supreme Court precedent, which clearly holds that fully settled or adjudicated cases are beyond the reach of otherwise fully retroactive decisional … In the case at bar, the majority justifies its holding on the unstable precedent established in Bradbury .

McDermott v. State

197 Wash. 79 · Washington Supreme Court · Nov 25, 1938

“Rogues’ gallery system of criminal identifica *81 tion,” and therefore constitutes a pernicious abrogation of indefeasible rights, privileges, and immunities of appellant, his lessee barbers, and all other barbers similarly … Every reasonable presumption must be indulged in favor of the constitutionality of this statute, and the burden rests upon appellant to establish clearly its invalidity. State v.

Tyner v. DSHS, Child Protective Serv.

1 P.3d 1148 · Washington Supreme Court · Jun 15, 2000

As this court noted, the Legislature has granted caseworkers only a qualified immunity even in the case of an emergency situation. Id. at 607 , 809 P.2d 143 . … Brown were dismissed before trial on the grounds of witness immunity. Ms.