Case law

David N. v. Holly Marie C.

137 Wash. App. 245 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Feb 13, 2007

statement offered into evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted, is not admissible at trial unless it qualifies as an exception. … Despite this language, which is apparently contained in the standard custody form used by the court to draft its findings and conclusions, the trial court’s findings and its oral ruling clearly establish that it applied the

State Of Washington, V Gabriel Indelicio Nevarez

Court of Appeals of Washington · Oct 25, 2022

Houston-Sconiers established that a trial court must consider mitigating qualities of youth, even when imposing a standard range sentence. See In re Pers. … Thus, we hold that these 19- and 20-year-old petitioners must qualify for some of the same constitutional protections as well.” Id. at 313 (emphasis added).

State Of Washington, Respondent/cross V Dennis M. Bauer, Appellant/cross

Court of Appeals of Washington · Dec 16, 2024

We conclude that the State clearly established the first and third factors required to introduce an excited utterance. The shooting itself certainly constitutes a startling event or condition. … As with LeTellier, the State suggests that the evidence is too prejudicial because it indicates that the State was hiding an immunity deal.

Kenmore Mhp, Llc, V. City Of Kenmore

504 P.3d 237 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Feb 8, 2022

MHP argues that the Board did not clearly establish its definition of “substantial compliance” in Your Snoqualmie Valley, and has issued decisions that conflict with its most recent interpretation of WAC 242-03-230. … Without more, we conclude that Cove Heights and the intervening decade between it and the Board’s decision here do not prevent the Board from now “clearly establishing” the four part test from Your Snoqualmie Valley.

LIFE CARE CENTERS OF AMERICA v. State

254 P.3d 919 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jun 27, 2011

As part of this program, DSHS compensates nursing facilities in this state for care they provide to residents who qualify for Medicaid. … Rather, we must determine the Legislature's intent, as expressed by the statutes before us. ¶ 34 Second, as we explained earlier in this opinion, the statutes clearly state that the MACMI and FACMI shall be determined from

Johnson v. WASHINGTON STATE DEPT. OF HEALTH

136 P.3d 760 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jun 6, 2006

letter was found a misrepresentation in that it was intended to convince the judge that Client A was in compliance with court-ordered services and that Johnson was providing those services, when in fact Johnson was neither qualified … She intended the court to believe that she was acting in her professional capacity as a counselor, even if in fact she had not established a professional relationship. ¶ 15 To be sanctionable, misconduct does not have to

In Re Dependency of Df-M.

236 P.3d 961 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Aug 2, 2010

The fact it does not identify every situation not qualifying as foster care cannot reasonably be interpreted to expand the compact. ¶ 25 Under Article V, the sending state retains jurisdiction over the child as if "the child … In any event, regulation 3 cannot control because it impermissibly expands the scope of the ICPC beyond that established in article III.

Quinn Construction Co. v. King County Fire Protection District No. 26

111 Wash. App. 19 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Mar 11, 2002

The trial court, therefore, correctly applied the Gostovich rule in determining that Quinn had not established a right to injunctive relief. … The trial court clearly had the discretion to stay discovery until after the CR 12(b)(6) hearing. CR 26(c)(1).

In Re Guardianship of Knutson

250 P.3d 1072 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Apr 18, 2011

The order is clearly directed only to the guardians to use the estate income for Janette's care and maintenance at Fircrest. … The cost of care is computed by subtracting allowable deductions from an individual's qualifying income. See RCW 43.20B.420 through .425 and WAC 388-513-1380 (calculation of financial participation in cost of care).

Albice v. PREMIER MORTG. SERVICES OF WASH.

239 P.3d 1148 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Sep 28, 2010

Albice/Teccas also moved for summary judgment, arguing that the foreclosure sale should be set aside as void because (1) Premier was not a qualified trustee with authority to conduct the sale and (2) the sale occurred after … Where, as here, the deed contains legal conclusions but not factual recitals that establish compliance with RCW 61.24.040(7), we decline to extend protection to a purchaser beyond what the legislature clearly intended.

Washington Election Integrity Coalition United v. Chandra Schumacher

Court of Appeals of Washington · Sep 12, 2023

Schumacher Supreme Court, this court’s opinion declares the meaning of the statute, including whether it qualifies as an “other statute” exempting records from disclosure under the PRA. Cf. … RCW 42.56.540 provides that “[t]he examination of any specific record may be enjoined” by establishing “that such examination would clearly not be in the public interest and would substantially and irreparably damage any

Suzette Gould, Et Ux. v. North Kitsap Business Park

Court of Appeals of Washington · Jan 19, 2016

This argument fails because Mitchell’s experience rendered him qualified to testify as an expert. … A party may introduce expert testimony if the expert is qualified, relies on generally- accepted theories, and assists the trier of fact. ER 702.

State Of Washington v. Paul Taylor Elliott

Court of Appeals of Washington · Mar 17, 2020

Elliott statutorily qualifies for a First Time Offender Waiver, the facts of this case do not warrant a sentence under the First Time Offender Waiver. 3. … excessive or clearly too lenient.

Alexandria Real Equities Inc. John J. Cox, Dean A. Takko, V. University Of Wa

Court of Appeals of Washington · Dec 5, 2023

The superior court’s findings of fact clearly found no relevance to the differences in the corporate forms of Wexford and LS W27. … The court held the disappointed bidder was too late to qualify for disappointed bidder standing. Id. at 572.

Junghee Kim Spicer v. Paul Patnode

443 P.3d 801 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jun 25, 2019

Infliction of emotional distress by intentional behavior is by itself inadequate to establish this tort. … Patnode is clearly a bad neighbor, but he also is bad at being an outrageous one.

State v. McPhee

156 Wash. App. 44 · Court of Appeals of Washington · May 11, 2010

The jury could have reasonably inferred that McPhee knew the firearms were stolen when he possessed them on February 9. ¶40 The evidence clearly establishes the corpus delicti for the crime of possession of stolen firearms … It is long standing and well established that a property owner may testify as to the property’s market value without being qualified as an expert in this regard. State v. Hammond, 6 Wn.

Eugster v. City of Spokane

39 P.3d 380 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Feb 5, 2002

Thus, a consensus on a position to be voted on at a later council meeting would qualify as a collective position and a "final action." Id. at 330-31, 979 P.2d 429 . … Eugster may be viewed as having fostered OPMA principles through his actions, but this conclusion must be established after fact-finding. If Mr.

Fabian-Miller v. Department of Social & Health Services

157 Wash. App. 179 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Aug 2, 2010

The fact it does not identify every situation not qualifying as foster care cannot reasonably be interpreted to expand the compact. ¶25 Under article V, the sending state retains jurisdiction over the child as if “the child … In any event, regulation 3 cannot control because it impermissibly expands the scope of the ICPC beyond that established in article III.

Eugster v. City of Spokane

110 Wash. App. 212 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Feb 5, 2002

Thus, a consensus on a position to be voted on at a later council meeting would qualify as a collective position and a “final action.” Id. at 330-31 . … Eugster may be viewed as having fostered OPMA principles through his actions, but this conclusion must be established after fact finding. If Mr.

State Of Washington, V Robert Eugene Ackerson

Court of Appeals of Washington · Mar 1, 2016

Ackerson does not argue that the program qualified as partial confinement, but he cites State v. Medina, 180 Wn.2d 282, 324 P.3d 682 (2014). … The Trial Court’s Imposition of LFOs Was Not Clearly Erroneous Here, the trial court’s assessment of Ackerson’s ability to pay was not clearly erroneous.