Case law

City Of Seattle, V. Delaura & Fred B. Norg

491 P.3d 237 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jul 19, 2021

Source of Duty In 1961, the legislature repealed the State’s sovereign immunity for governmental functions. LAWS OF 1961, ch. 136 § 1 (codified as RCW 4.92.090). … In Beltran-Serrano, our Supreme Court clearly held that “[a]t common law, every individual owes a duty of reasonable care to refrain from 3 See Medic One, SEATTLE.GOV, http://www.seattle.gov/fire/about-us/about-the- department

Pamela K. Scott, V. Louise Love

Court of Appeals of Washington · Mar 14, 2022

immunity. … “It is well established that a prosecutor who acts within the scope of his or her duties in initiating and pursuing a criminal prosecution is absolutely immune from liability.” Tanner v. City of Federal Way, 100 Wn.

State v. Diaz-Cardona

123 Wash. App. 477 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Sep 27, 2004

By providing for suspended manifest injustice dispositions in appropriate cases, the statute clearly permits the juvenile court to consider and plan for the possibility that community-based treatment might fail. … Schaaf, 109 Wn.2d 1, 7-8, 10 , 743 P.2d 240 (1987) (recognizing that “The policies of the [Juvenile Justice Act] are twofold: to establish a system of having primary responsibility for, being accountable for, and responding

Woods View II, LLC v. Kitsap County

188 Wash. App. 1 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Apr 14, 2015

Even assuming without deciding that WVII establishes intentional interference resulting in termination of relationship, WVII fails to establish a genuine dispute as to prong (4), improper purpose/means. … That doctrine immunizes petitions to government from certain types of liability. Because we hold that WVII’s claims against the County fail, we need not address the County’s immunity under this doctrine.

Washington Independent Telephone Ass'n v. Telecommunications Ratepayers Ass'n for Cost-based & Equitable Rates

75 Wash. App. 356 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Aug 10, 1994

Ct. 1240 (1983), a modified structure for telephone service in Washington State was established. … Thus, if the CCF access line "surcharge” is not a rate charged on persons or businesses, it is clearly not authorized by this statute.

Starr v. STATE DEPT. OF EMPLOYMENT SEC.

123 P.3d 513 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Nov 22, 2005

"GOOD CAUSE" UNDER RCW 50.20.050 ¶ 15 Starr argues that RCW 50.20.050(2)(b) does not establish an exclusive list of non-disqualifying circumstances. … This subsection contains no additional open-ended circumstance of any type; and it clearly contains no general category entitled "compelling personal reasons," as Starr would have us read into the statute. ¶ 19 On the contrary

King v. Hutson

97 Wash. App. 590 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Nov 2, 1999

Under the statute, the dogs would qualify as “dangerous” if they again bit, attacked or endangered the safety of humans or domestic animals. RCW 16.08.070(2)(c). Mr. … In most situations, those principles are sufficient to determine whether a plaintiff has established a cause of action for negligence, regardless of whether the defendant is a governmental entity.

In Re The Detention Of Randy Ryan Ross

547 P.3d 278 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Apr 29, 2024

The charges brought by the State in Ross’ 2015 and 2022 cases qualify as sexually violent offenses under RCW 71.09.020(18). … We decline to extend the right to a jury trial to this preliminary determination because, as analyzed herein, that is clearly not the intent of our legislature. Citing to In re Det. of Greenwood, 130 Wn.

Discover Bank v. Maurie Lemley, et ux

Court of Appeals of Washington · Mar 18, 2014

"Any other summary judgment pleadings," the court explained, "were clearly designated for [Discover's] own later scheduled ... noticed hearing." CP at 851. … Our ruling also does not address whether Joshua Smith or James Ball qualifies to testify to the facts stated in their respective affidavits or whether either qualifies to identify the documents attached to their respective

Brooks Abel, V. Grant County Public Utility District

Court of Appeals of Washington · Feb 21, 2023

Recreational Use Immunity Ruling Finally, Abel challenges the trial court’s decision that RCW 4.24.210, the recreational use immunity statute, applied as a matter of law. … trial court’s ruling on recreational use immunity was also harmless.

State v. Morgan

123 Wash. App. 810 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Oct 25, 2004

The court clearly instructed the jury that a superseding, intervening cause relieves the defendant of liability because it breaks the causal chain. … But the fact that a jury instruction is modeled from a pattern instruction does not render it immune from judicial scrutiny.

Fraternal Order of Eagles, Tenino Aerie No. 564 v. Grand Aerie

108 Wash. App. 208 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Aug 3, 2001

Clearly, the series of nouns (“institute, club, or place”) are modified by this adjective clause and “fraternal organizations” is not. … By this sentence construction we can clearly understand what the common idea is that connects those three entities together — a nature that may be “distinctly private.”

State v. Howerton

187 Wash. App. 357 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Mar 30, 2015

For instance, in Z.U.E., the court found one informant’s tip unreliable when the record failed to clearly establish the basis for the informant’s knowledge. Z.U.E., 178 Wn. App. at 785 . … App. at 864 . ¶20 The record here clearly establishes Parks’s basis of knowledge.

Colin v. Rogers

5 Wash. App. 113 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jun 10, 1971

Consequently, we hold that the host-guest relationship had clearly terminated and it is for us to determine, on the facts of this case, whether or not it had been resumed. … If the conduct and intent of the parties controls the establishment of the host-guest relationship, then it follows that such conduct and intent establishes when such relationship commences as well as when it terminates.

Rhoades v. Department of Labor & Industries

143 Wash. App. 832 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jan 22, 2008

Auman clearly applied RCW 51.32.080, the same statute at issue here. 116 Finally, Ms. Rhoades argues that neither Auman nor Messer 3 addressed the gender discrimination issue raised here. … The ERA’s broad protection goes beyond that of the equal protection clause of the federal constitution and the privileges and immunities clause of the state constitution. State v.

In Re Detention of Durbin

248 P.3d 124 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Mar 8, 2011

that Durbin met the criteria for commitment as an SVP. ¶ 8 On an ex parte finding of probable cause, the State transferred Durbin to the Thurston County Jail and, on September 30, 2004, Durbin stipulated that the petition established … Thus, the legislature clearly intended that the 2009 amendments apply to individuals in Durbin's position, i.e., individuals awaiting commitment under chapter 71.09 RCW and confined in a secure facility such as the SCC.

Vogt v. Hovander

27 Wash. App. 168 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jan 9, 1980

The Boettcher case was an action to establish an oral contract to devise wherein the plaintiff called the estate's coexecutor as an adverse witness. … [T]he book here offered was not admissible because it was clearly not a shopbook. . . . . . .

Clark County v. Western Washington Growth Management Hearings Board

161 Wash. App. 204 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Apr 13, 2011

Lewis County established “Soccer Fields” as a short form for 142 Wn.2d 543 . Lewis County, 157 Wn.2d at 497 . … The Growth Board found that these processes contained no clearly erroneous errors.

Serres v. Department of Retirement Systems

163 Wash. App. 569 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Sep 12, 2011

The settlement agreement established separate distribution funds for each subclass. … .” ¶33 Because the foregoing uncontested facts clearly demonstrate that the individual settlement awards provided retroactive compensation for services provided by county employees, the awards are “compensation earnable”

Clark County Public Utility District No. 1 v. Department of Revenue

153 Wash. App. 737 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Dec 15, 2009

Conversely, the Districts maintain that the basic service charges do not qualify as “gross revenue” under the statute. … The Last Antecedent Rule ¶37 The last antecedent rule of statutory construction provides that unless a contrary intent appears in the statute, a qualifying phrase refers to the last antecedent, and a comma before the qualifying