Case law

Hatch v. Cole

128 Wash. 107 · Washington Supreme Court · Jan 17, 1924

In this respect the case does not differ from that of a jury or umpire, if we assume that the members of the board were not entitled to the possibly higher immunities of a judge. . . . … The question, therefore, is whether the offered proof would establish misbehavior and evidence thereof should have been admitted.

Hogue v. Port of Seattle

54 Wash. 2d 799 · Washington Supreme Court · Jun 11, 1959

“On the other hand, legislative conclusions based on findings of fact are not immune from judicial review where they are arbitrary and unwarranted. 16 C. J. S., Constitutional Law, § 151(3), p. 764. . . . … The act created the state reclamation board with certain specified powers, including the power to lease or sell farms to qualified applicants under the conditions and limitations provided therein.

State ex rel. Davis v. Clausen

47 Wash. 372 · Washington Supreme Court · Oct 19, 1907

He was appointed on April 1, 1905, for a full term of six years, and filed his bond and oath of office at that time, and at all times since has been a duly acting and qualified member of the state board of control. … The amendment to §3 shows clearly that the only change intended was the change in regard to salary. This question has been passed upon by this court in Mudgett v.

Manufactured Housing Communities v. State

142 Wash. 2d 347 · Washington Supreme Court · Nov 9, 2000

It suffices to say that taking private property for private use is clearly a matter of local concern consistently recognized by Washington courts. State ex rel. Convention & Trade Ctr. v. … No amount of hardship in a given case would justify the establishment of such a precedent.

State ex rel. Post-Intelligencer Publishing Co. v. Lindsley

3 Wash. 125 · Washington Supreme Court · Nov 14, 1891

The treasurer, therefore, being in a position where he is as well qualified as the auditor to say whether or not there is an appropriation, may lawfully question the legality of any warrant on that ground. II. … Clearly the sum set apart for the maintenance of the university is “otherwise appropriated,” although it is a part of the fund known in the treasurer’s books as the “university fund.”

In Re Detention of Turay

986 P.2d 790 · Washington Supreme Court · Dec 22, 1999

Accordingly, despite the fact that the case law clearly establishes the proper double jeopardy test to apply, Turay is advocating the use of an erroneous test. [27] In an attempt to buttress his "as applied" challenge, Turay … Turay has clearly failed to carry his burden of proof.

Hyman v. Barmon

6 Wash. 516 · Washington Supreme Court · Jun 20, 1893

Rep. 903), we think we are justified in holding these judgment liens void, although admitting that it is not clearly shown that the judgment creditors had notice of the intended assignment. … The assignee not having qualified makes this course proper. So ordered. Dunbar, C. J., and Hoyt and Anders, JJ"., concur. Scott, J., concurs in the result.

Henson v. Employment Security Department

113 Wash. 2d 374 · Washington Supreme Court · Sep 28, 1989

After review of the record, we find that the facts found by the Superior Court are not clearly erroneous. … The key is the qualifying phrase "under the circumstances".

State ex rel. Gillette v. Clausen

44 Wash. 437 · Washington Supreme Court · Nov 19, 1906

Under § 2, supra, the commission clearly has authority to fix the compensation of its secretary and clerks, within the limits imposed by the statute, and we think the same power exists as to the experts provided for in §§ … On the other hand, it would seem to be in the interest of the state, and in consonance with sound business principles, to know the extent of the state’s liability before the indebtedness against it becomes an established

Jain v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.

926 P.2d 923 · 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 .

O'BRIEN v. Artz

74 Wash. 2d 558 · Washington Supreme Court · Oct 3, 1968

O’Brien qualified as administrator of the estate of Corinne J. Dyke and as guardian for Cecilee L. Dyke, a minor. He commenced this action for damages for the wrongful death of Corinne J. Dyke and injuries to Cecilee J. … Applying this rule, the record establishes certain facts with regard to the first collision. Tacoma Avenue, from curb to curb, is 55 feet wide, and the centerline is at a point 27% feet from either side.

All Seasons Living Centers, Inc. v. State

127 Wash. 2d 774 · Washington Supreme Court · Oct 12, 1995

A tax exemption presupposes a taxable status and the burden is on the taxpayer to establish eligibility for the benefit. Group Health Coop. v. Washington State Tax Comm’n, 72 Wn.2d 422 , 429, 433 P.2d 201 (1967). … Here a comma introduced the "but only if’ qualifier.

State v. Clarke

156 Wash. 2d 880 · Washington Supreme Court · May 11, 2006

exceptional sentence as a matter of law, or (3) under an abuse of discretion standard, the exceptional sentence is clearly too excessive or clearly too lenient. … The dissent fails to provide any support for its assertion that, in addition to Clarke’s life sentence, Clarke’s minimum term also qualifies as the “ ‘relevant statutory maximum’ ” contemplated by Blakely and Apprendi.

City of Seattle v. State

100 Wash. 2d 232 · Washington Supreme Court · Aug 31, 1983

The funding program is open to incumbents as well as other candidates who qualify. … The campaign financing ordinance establishes eligibility criteria and expenditure limits, requires candidates to sign a campaign contract, and matches only qualified funds.

Glaubach v. Regence BlueShield

149 Wash. 2d 827 · Washington Supreme Court · Jul 17, 2003

The OIC listed 31 statutes as establishing its authority to promulgate this rule. See note following WAC 284-43-822. 1 *835 RCW 48.43.035 is listed as one of these statutes; RCW 48.43.018 is not. … Glaubach correctly notes that the commissioner stated clearly that this rule “imposed no new duties” on health carriers because “[c]urrently, unfair discrimination based on sex is prohibited in insurance statutes.” Id.

Boyles v. Department of Retirement Systems

105 Wash. 2d 499 · Washington Supreme Court · Mar 27, 1986

Otherwise, qualified individuals who would receive appointments to higher exempt civil service positions would be reticent to accept the promotion for fear of jeopardizing their reversion rights if they later were appointed … He ruled that the administrative record "clearly and convincingly establish Dick Boyles' inability to perform the duties of deputy sheriff with average efficiency and, therefore, establish his right to disability retirement

State v. MOTTMAN MERC. CO., INC.

51 Wash. 2d 722 · Washington Supreme Court · Feb 20, 1958

All legitimate evidence tending to establish the value of the land with the minerals in it is permissible. … This method of determining value, assuming that Dunn was qualified to express an opinion of market value, was clearly in violation of the rule recognized by the majority, and announced in the Rosamond Lake case, wherein the

In re Disciplinary Proceeding Against Keenan

Washington Supreme Court · Feb 10, 2022

It then defines “independence” as “a judge’s freedom from influence or controls other than those established by law.” Id. … In contrast, a judge can now clearly use judicial letterhead to provide a recommendation letter. Rule 1.3 cmt. 2; EAO 86-12, 87-10, 88-05.

Nixon v. Post

13 Wash. 181 · Washington Supreme Court · Dec 5, 1895

Post, and being in due form, prima facie established the fact of its regular execution and delivery. … It follows that her testimony must he weighed in their light, and, when thus weighed, we are of the opinion that it did not so clearly establish her allegation, to the effect that she had never executed the deed, as to overcome

State v. Brown

139 Wash. 2d 20 · Washington Supreme Court · Sep 9, 1999

Brown has failed to establish misconduct. She concedes that if her coat had been introduced into evidence, the jury could have used it to conduct the experiment. … Brown, relying on In re Charles, asserts that enhancements under RCW 9.94A.310(4)(e) are not immune from modification by other provisions of the SRA, namely RCW 9.94A.120’s exceptional sentence provisions.