Case law

State v. Woods

154 Wash. 2d 613 · Washington Supreme Court · Jun 30, 2005

Here the trial court found the children were competent as of March 2001 (“But she clearly had the ability in March of ‘01 to have accurate impressions of events that were occurring to her.”). … problem is nothing in this record, and I mean nothing, establishes that the alleged abuse took place in March 2001 or thereafter. ¶44 The lead opinion claims the evidence “established a relatively narrow time frame during

State ex rel. Smith v. Neal

25 Wash. 264 · Washington Supreme Court · Jun 1, 1901

Smith, the duly elected, qualified, and acting county clerk of said county, against Grant Heal, the auditor of said county, and the board of county commissioners, to compel said board to allow a certain claim alleged to be … The salary to be paid has been clearly and definitely fixed according to population.

In Re Dependency of KNJ

257 P.3d 522 · Washington Supreme Court · Aug 2, 2011

In this case, constitutionally qualified superior court judges held dependency review hearings on July 5, 2007 and November 21, 2007. … The State clearly failed to establish this element as to K.N.J.'s father. That being the case, the trial court should not have gone on to decide if a termination of *532 K.N.J.'

Smith v. Retallick

48 Wash. 2d 360 · Washington Supreme Court · Feb 16, 1956

In its oral decision, at the close of the case, the court expressed the opinion that: "... the evidence I think establishes quite clearly, that aside from the anger which had been engendered between the parties because of … As to the above statutory provision, the court said: "But we think it clear, upon a mere reading of the section, that it merely establishes the nonliability of the husband as an individual.

Eidinger v. Mamlock

138 Wash. 276 · Washington Supreme Court · Mar 29, 1926

Soon thereafter his last will was duly proven and admitted to probate in the superior court for Pierce county, Gertrude duly qualified as executrix thereof and proceeded with the administration of the estate of the father … The dangers incident to the establishment of the existence of such an oral agreement has been emphasized by this court, and the necessity of proof of the most convincing nature to establish such an agreement has been repeatedly

In Re Stenson

102 P.3d 151 · Washington Supreme Court · Nov 24, 2004

While the majority believes that the lack of the word "should" is dispositive, I believe that it clearly was not necessary for the legislature to have included the word in the statutory scheme. … However, we do not reach this issue because Stenson is unable to establish that we should review these reports.

WASH.-ORE. SHIPPERS ETC. 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, therefore, *162 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.

State ex rel. Onstine v. Bartlett

131 Wash. 546 · Washington Supreme Court · Dec 4, 1924

“In the present case, it is pertinent to inquire: What provision of the constitution has been clearly violated by the act of 1913? … In both cases the legislature prescribed the limitations, and, in so doing, exercised a power clearly contemplated by the constitution.

Boeing Co. v. Department of Licensing

103 Wash. 2d 581 · Washington Supreme Court · Jan 11, 1985

While the second and third exemptions focus on the nature of the particular flight, the first exemption clearly exempts fuel used by certificated air carriers as a class. … It was established during the audit and lower court proceedings that a small portion of the fuel Boeing used during the audit period was taxable.

Dobbin v. Pacific Coast Coal Co.

25 Wash. 2d 190 · Washington Supreme Court · Jun 20, 1946

At the trial, certain facts were established by evidence which was unrebutted and undisputed. … The reason for this rule is clearly shown in 37 C. J.

Deaconess Hospital v. Washington State Highway Commission

66 Wash. 2d 378 · Washington Supreme Court · Jun 7, 1965

The immunity is absolute, and, when consent is given, it may be qualified or conditional and may specify a particular court in which the permitted actions may be maintained.” State ex rel. Thielicke v. … If it is not an action against the state, then the rule of immunity does not apply.

Matzger v. Arcade Building & Realty Co.

80 Wash. 401 · Washington Supreme Court · Jul 13, 1914

Oliver, supra, was clearly a case of that kind. … The colloquy between the court and counsel above quoted clearly advised counsel for the appellant that the respondent would rely upon estoppel as establishing a valid lease.

State v. Salinas

87 Wash. 2d 112 · Washington Supreme Court · May 13, 1976

App. 518 , 301 So.2d 280 (1974) *119 the jury selection commenced with 36 qualified veniremen; 14 were black. … Whether these injuries were so atrocious, aggravated, and harmful as to amount to assault in the second degree was, however, clearly a question of fact.

Guillen v. Pierce County

31 P.3d 628 · Washington Supreme Court · Sep 13, 2001

Guillen, however, does not qualify, since the statute's examples of qualifying parties clearly indicate a restricted understanding of "proper interest" that cannot reasonably be construed to include persons involved in entirely … But that ruling was promptly vacated as "clearly wrong." *642 Id.

Weyerhaeuser Co. v. Department of Ecology

86 Wash. 2d 310 · Washington Supreme Court · Jan 8, 1976

Appellant appeals from the superior court judgment qualifying the entire cost of Boiler #10 for certification under RCW 82.34. … Respondent cannot do this because that boiler is clearly not being operated for the “primary purpose” of pollution control.

Brower v. Wells

103 Wash. 2d 96 · Washington Supreme Court · Nov 6, 1984

The Court said that a rule of no immunity for cities acts as a deterrent in preventing future constitutional violations. … It clearly establishes an "alternative procedure" which "may" be used "in lieu of" the procedures outlined in RCW 35.50.010 et seq. [3] 42 U.S.C. § 1983 provides: "Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance,

Nelson v. City of Seattle

64 Wash. 2d 862 · Washington Supreme Court · Aug 27, 1964

A comprehensive plan for the development of the city, and one which would apparently qualify under the statute, was forwarded to the City Council by the Planning Commission in 1957. … Such language is clearly permissive rather than mandatory legislation. See: 35 Wash. L. Rev. 551 , 552.

Glaubach v. Regence Blueshield

74 P.3d 115 · 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] 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.

State Ex Rel. Washington State Finance Committee v. Martin

62 Wash. 2d 645 · Washington Supreme Court · Aug 7, 1963

Thoughts held clearly in the beginning may obscure and lose their outline as the present merges with the future and becomes the past again. … Milwaukee, 17 Wis. (2d) 26, 115 N.W. (2d) 618 (1962), an immunity first declared by that court in 1873, found the immunity doctrine to be faulty and erroneous and not supported by the historic reasons claimed for it, and,

Wash. State Hous. Fin. Comm'n v. Nat'l Homebuyers Fund, Inc.

193 Wash. 2d 704 · Washington Supreme Court · Jul 25, 2019

One of these programs assists low-income and first-time home buyers qualify for a mortgage by lending them funds for the *708 required down payment. … Thus, the interest against unauthorized competition was clearly within the zone of interests "regulated or protected" by the statutes.