Case law

In re the Guardianship of the Estate of Bayer

111 Wash. 276 · Washington Supreme Court · Jun 8, 1920

While it establishes, in our opinion, the fact that she is not insane in the sense that she requires confinement, or requires the supervision of a guardian over her person, we think it falls far short of establishing that … Bayer; clearly demonstrating, as we view it, incompetency on her part to bargain in her own interests. We find nothing in the additional evidence that shows a return of capacity.

Knutson v. Fredlund

56 Wash. 634 · Washington Supreme Court · Jan 12, 1910

mandatory, reasonable and not in conflict with any act of Congress, seems clearly within the principles announced or tacitly recognized in O’Donnell v. … Appellant’s only purpose in attempting to show respondent’s alleged nonperformance of work was to establish a forfeiture of respondent’s claims.

Pierce County ex rel. Bellingham v. Duffy

104 Wash. 426 · Washington Supreme Court · Dec 13, 1918

Taylor, all of whom were shown to have personally examined the Duffy lands and to be well qualified to testify as to market values generally. … These instructions clearly state the law. They are supported by reason and authority.

Critzer v. Oban

52 Wash. 2d 446 · Washington Supreme Court · May 29, 1958

They changed the corporate name to Oban’s Hatchery, Inc., and qualified it to engage in business in California. … But the facts of the present case, as established by the findings, do not warrant the application of those principles.

State v. Work

75 Wash. 2d 204 · Washington Supreme Court · Jan 9, 1969

Where this resolution requires, or where special authority granted pursuant to this resolution requires that a use shall be entirely enclosed within a building, this definition shall be qualified by adding ‘and enclosed on … The zoning ordinance clearly prohibits a discarded school bus being turned into living quarters and immobilized, but it does not prohibit defendant’s dwelling unit upon the land owned by her.

Delaney v. Spokane County Board of Commissioners

161 Wash. 2d 249 · Washington Supreme Court · Aug 16, 2007

“There is a clearly demonstrated need for at least one additional judge in the Spokane County District Court. . . . The county legislative authority wants the new position to be created and has agreed to pay for it. … However, we qualified this holding with the recognition that any judicial positions created after January 1, 1992, would be subject to the requirements of RCW 3.34.020 and .025. Id.

State v. McCollum

17 Wash. 2d 85 · Washington Supreme Court · Mar 16, 1943

Clearly, the foregoing provision is mandatory, in view of Art. … arrest was made or any other, the cases do not so clearly define how far an officer may go, in searching the room, premises or effects of the person arrested.

Marley v. Department of Labor & Industries

125 Wash. 2d 533 · Washington Supreme Court · Dec 22, 1994

Marley again to tell her that her two children qualified for dependents’ benefits; however, because the Department’s information showed that Mrs. … Whether right or wrong, the Department clearly had the authority to decide whether Mrs. Marley was living in a state of abandonment under RCW 51.08.020.

Williamson Investment Co. v. Williamson

96 Wash. 529 · Washington Supreme Court · May 29, 1917

“The power to convert real estate into money against the will of the owner, is an extraordinary and dangerous power, and ought never to be exercised unless the necessity therefor is clearly established.” Vesper v. … In the light of the foregoing well established principles, has this burden been adequately met?

In Re Detention of Hawkins

238 P.3d 1175 · Washington Supreme Court · Sep 9, 2010

RCW 71.09.040(1)-(3) provide for a hearing to establish that there is probable cause to believe that a person is an SVP. … But in RCW 71.09.040(4), the description of the examiner, "by a person deemed to be professionally qualified to conduct such an examination," can be modified by the "pursuant" clause because one can deem someone qualified

State Ex Rel. Haugland v. Smythe

25 Wash. 2d 161 · Washington Supreme Court · Jun 7, 1946

The respondent, Ralph Smythe, is the duly qualified and acting judge of the superior court for the same *163 county and, as such, has charge of juvenile matters in that county. … The facts in the case, as stated above and as appear from relator’s own brief, clearly reveal that the child’s destiny thus far has been intimately connected with, and to some extent at least shaped by, the financial condition

L.M. by and Through Dussault v. Hamilton

193 Wash. 2d 113 · Washington Supreme Court · Mar 21, 2019

That literature shows that NFOL can clearly cause BPI, but it does not describe what types of BPI—avulsion, rupture, etc.—this includes. CP at 1842-43. … And that is clearly the case here.

Washington State Liquor Control Board v. Washington State Personnel Board

88 Wash. 2d 368 · Washington Supreme Court · Mar 10, 1977

The source of a state agency's rights, powers, duties, and privileges and immunities is statutory. … All acts or parts of acts, whether special or comprehensive in nature, which are inconsistent with the provisions of this chapter, whether in the review procedures which they establish or otherwise, are hereby repealed, but

Yelle v. Bishop

55 Wash. 2d 286 · Washington Supreme Court · Dec 17, 1959

The office of state auditor is established in the executive department by Art. … The powers and duties of the office thus established are set forth in Art.

Barnes v. Packwood

10 Wash. 50 · Washington Supreme Court · Nov 10, 1894

The general rule laid down by the text writers is that parol evidence is not admissible to contradict, qualify, extend or vary written instruments, but that their interpretation must depend upon their own terms. … In all such cases if the mistake is clearly made out by proofs entirely satisfactory, equity will reform the contract so as to make it conformable to the precise intent of the parties.

Lincoln v. New York Life Insurance

192 Wash. 507 · Washington Supreme Court · Dec 7, 1937

. *510 Appellant’s sole contention is that the evidence is insufficient to establish total disability of the respondent during the period in litigation as the term “total disability” is defined in the policy. … It clearly appears that, if the respondent had qualified himself for office work, his physical condition is such that the hours of confinement necessary to the performance of clerical work would result in fatigue that would

Mott v. McDonald

147 Wash. 106 · Washington Supreme Court · Mar 19, 1928

McDonald qualified as such executor, and the respondents presented to him a demand for the unpaid notes and a demand for the cancellation of the mortgage given to secure them. … His memorandum opinion is brought up with the record, and in it he especially states that the evidence clearly establishes the subsequent oral agreement, and clearly establishes that the respondents performed the agreement

Tegman v. Accident & Medical Investigations, Inc.

150 Wash. 2d 102 · Washington Supreme Court · Aug 28, 2003

Nor are the negligent defendants jointly and severally liable under RCW 4.22.030 for any such damages because their liability clearly is determined under RCW 4.22.070. … However, this percentage cannot be used to establish these entities’ share of proportionate fault for nonintentional acts or omissions under RCW 4.22.070.

Farris v. Munro

99 Wash. 2d 326 · Washington Supreme Court · Apr 21, 1983

This case involves a challenge to the recently established state lottery. … In response to the inquiries of several senators, Senator Walgren described the measure as requiring 60 percent approval of any initiative or referendum establishing a lottery.

Andrus v. Church

117 Wash. 627 · Washington Supreme Court · Nov 29, 1921

It appeared quite clearly from the testimony that the respondent was incapable of handling the situation that she then had to deal with, although she may have been successful in teaching elsewhere, that the discipline of … A. 317, we held that, in a controversy between a teacher and a district board, a member of the board who has expressed hostility toward the teacher and has become a partisan is not qualified to sit in judgment.