Case law

Kimberly Bogardus v. City of Yakima

Court of Appeals of Washington · Apr 3, 2025

If the moving party satisfies its burden, then the burden shifts to the nonmoving party to establish there is a genuine issue for the trier of fact. … She provides no citation to the record supporting her argument, and the letter itself clearly contradicts her unsupported statement.

Haselwood v. Bremerton Ice Arena, Inc.

155 P.3d 952 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Apr 10, 2007

." ¶28 The agreement with the City establishes the extent of BIA's interest in the ice arena. … Furthermore, when we read the mechanic's lien statute as a whole, it clearly establishes a single lien that attaches to the realty through the improvement. [5] ¶ 39 RCW 60.04.011(5) defines improvements as: (a) Constructing

Ronald Fagg v. Csk Auto, Inc.

Court of Appeals of Washington · Dec 8, 2014

PWWS and CSK each moved for summary judgment, claiming that Fagg's negligence and strict liability claims were precluded by the WPLA, that they are immune from liability under the WPLA, and that Fagg failed to establish … The statute immunizes product sellers from product liability claims except under certain enumerated circumstances.

State v. Bottrell

14 P.3d 164 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Dec 15, 2000

A: Well, she was clearly in a position where she perceived herself again in an abusive position where her life was being threatened. … This standard is consistent with established case law.

Dank's Wonder Emporium, V. Washington State Liquor & Cannabis Board

Court of Appeals of Washington · Jun 7, 2022

A qualified party shall be considered to have prevailed if the qualified party obtained relief on a significant issue that achieves some benefit that the qualified party sought. … Here, Dank’s has not provided any evidence that it constitutes a “qualified party” under RCW 4.84.350(1).

Hickly v. Bare

135 Wash. App. 676 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Oct 24, 2006

: (1) In all actions involving fault of more than one entity, the trier of fact shall determine the percentage of the total fault which is attributable to every entity which caused the claimant’s damages except entities immune … Brian could not remember whether he had had this discussion with Hickly, but Hickly clearly remembered it.

State v. Perez

184 Wash. App. 321 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Nov 3, 2014

This does qualify as a startling event and that the injuries are a startling condition. … The record establishes not only a medical emergency but also concerns for the safety of other inmates and corrections officers.

Ang v. Martin

118 Wash. App. 553 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Sep 23, 2003

Clearly the purpose of Schroeder’s testimony was to prove that the jury did not say that they were going to acquit the Angs. Further, Schroeder’s testimony does not directly contradict Almeda’s credibility. … Rules of evidence are designed to aid in establishing the truth.

Doe v. Corporation of the President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints

141 Wash. App. 407 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Sep 17, 2007

A grant of immunity from liability clearly implies that civil *423 liability can exist in the first place. Accordingly, we conclude that a private cause of action is implied under the mandated reporting statute. B. … Although K.S. was old enough to clearly testify, on balance the probative value of V.C.’s testimony outweighed the prejudicial effect.”

Xiao Ping Chen v. City of Seattle

153 Wash. App. 890 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Dec 28, 2009

A trier of fact may conclude that a municipality breached its duty of care based on the totality of the circumstances established by the evidence. … As a human factors analyst, [Alexander is] qualified to analyze and give opinions about the interaction between roadway characteristics and the cues it conveys to the roadway users, including drivers and pedestrians.”

Daniel Bray v. Pierce County

Court of Appeals of Washington · Jan 5, 2021

To qualify as a public policy for purposes of the wrongful discharge tort, a policy must be “truly public” and sufficiently clear. Sedlacek, 145 Wn.2d at 389. … Our review of the statutory authority, as well as prior judicial decisions clearly recognize a clear mandate of public policy to protect victims of domestic violence abuse.

Xiao Ping Chen v. City of Seattle

223 P.3d 1230 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Dec 28, 2009

A trier of fact may conclude that a municipality breached its duty of care based on the totality of the circumstances established by the evidence. … As a human factors analyst, [Alexander is] qualified to analyze and give opinions about the interaction between roadway characteristics and the cues it conveys to the roadway users, including drivers and pedestrians." [2]

State v. Bottrell

103 Wash. App. 706 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Dec 15, 2000

A: Well, she was clearly in a position where she perceived herself again in an abusive position where her life was being threatened. … This standard is consistent with established case law. See Edmon, 28 Wn. App. at 102 (expert must examine and diagnose defendant personally and testify “to an opinion with reasonable medical certainty”); State v.

Cowlitz County v. Martin

165 P.3d 51 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Aug 14, 2007

Clearly, the Legislature did not intend to grant any eminent domain authority by passage of the Salmon Recovery Act. … In doing so, our Legislature clearly elected not to grant eminent domain power to protect this public interest.

Garcia v. Department of Transportation

161 Wash. App. 1 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Feb 22, 2011

Miller, who by all accounts is certainly qualified as an expert in this area, in his opinion, the City failed to exercise proper engineering discretion by not demanding or requesting of the state Department of Transportation … It is well established that in order to hold a municipality liable for failure to provide a safe roadway, the plaintiff must establish “more than that the government’s breach of duty might have caused the injury.”

Kennedy v. Sea-Land Service, Inc.

62 Wash. App. 839 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Sep 16, 1991

The employee sought to recover under maritime law in federal district court because state law gave immunity to both defendants. … Further, Container Stevedoring agreed to "abide by the policies, rules and procedures which Sea-Land may from time to time establish . . .".

In Re Detention of Law

204 P.3d 230 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jul 23, 2008

The examiners who wrote the summaries were not identified. ¶ 15 The trial court ruled that the contents of the letter were "clearly hearsay" and would not be admissible as substantive evidence. … But the court ruled that "to ask him about statements in the letter and asking him to explain it, deny it or admit it, [calls for] clearly inadmissible hearsay." ¶ 16 The trial court's ruling was correct.

King County, V. Friends Of Sammamish Valley

Court of Appeals of Washington · Jun 12, 2023

The Board’s deference to an agency’s action under the GMA ends when it is shown that the action is clearly erroneous. Id. … However, 29 of these parcels are equal to or greater than 4.5 acres and already qualified for WBD uses under preexisting code without any of the new restrictions Ordinance 19030 imposes.

Blue Spirits Distilling, Llc v. Washington State Liquor & Cannabis Board

Court of Appeals of Washington · Dec 22, 2020

With limited exceptions, the APA establishes the exclusive means for judicial review of agency action. RCW 34.05.510. … Exhaustion of administrative remedies is required when: “(1) a claim is cognizable in the first instance by an agency alone; (2) the agency has clearly established mechanisms for the resolution of complaints by aggrieved

State v. Howe

212 P.3d 565 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jul 21, 2009

. ¶ 9 To determine whether an out-of-state conviction qualifies as a "sex offense," a trial court compares the out-of-state statute with comparable laws of this state. See State v. … The State, therefore, failed to establish an essential element of the crime of failure to register as a sex offender. Werneth, 147 Wash.App. at 555 , 197 P.3d 1195 .