Case law

Earl Vernon v. Aacres Allvest, Llc

Court of Appeals of Washington · Sep 3, 2014

A child would frequently be able to establish dependence on a parent, but the inverse is likely rare. The same can be said in comparing spouses with siblings. … The Philippides court rejected a similar argument based on the privileges and immunities clause. 151 Wn.2d at 392 -93.

Pettis v. State

98 Wash. App. 553 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Dec 20, 1999

judgment, and that Mikkelsen is entitled to qualified immunity. … Because we hold that no duty of care was owed to Pettis, we do not reach the issue of qualified immunity.

Parry v. George H. Brown & Associates, Inc.

46 Wash. App. 193 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Dec 11, 1986

A communication among partners concerning a partnership lawsuit to recover money owed the partnership is clearly within this "common interest" area. … Proof of knowledge or reckless disregard as to the falsity of a statement is required to establish abuse of a qualified privilege. Guntheroth v. Rodaway, 107 Wn.2d 170 , 176 n.2, 727 P.2d 982 (1986); Bender v.

Walters v. Hampton

14 Wash. App. 548 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Dec 9, 1975

Respondent City supports the dismissal by asserting the doctrine of discretionary sovereign immunity, Evangelical United Brethren Church v. … His duty to prosecute “all violations of city ordinances which come-to his knowledge” clearly involves an initial determination by him that an ordinance has been violated.

Nieshe v. Concrete School District

129 Wash. App. 632 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jul 5, 2005

The superior court dismissed Nieshe’s parents as plaintiffs for lack of standing and the individual defendants based on qualified immunity. … Weisman. 32 In Lee, the Court was asked to decide whether including prayer as part of a high school graduation ceremony contravened the establishment clause of the First Amendment. 33 To be consistent with the establishment

Yonker v. Department of Social & Health Services

85 Wash. App. 71 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Feb 10, 1997

Neither of *80 these qualifiers necessarily means that the protected group must he small or narrow. Indeed, such is not the requirement. … The Legislature imposed a specific duty oil the Department, and the Legislature has abrogated governmental immunity (RCW 4.96.010).

Hansen v. Horn Rapids O.R v. Park

85 Wash. App. 424 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Mar 18, 1997

The burden is on the moving party to establish its right to judgment as a matter of law. Higgins v. Stafford, 123 Wn.2d 160, 169 , 866 P.2d 31 (1994). Mr. … Races will not be permitted to continue if there is not at least one (1) ambulance and qualified individual (as indicated above) present.

Garibay v. State

131 Wash. App. 454 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Dec 6, 2005

The “public duty doctrine” has modified the traditional concept of sovereign immunity. … This intent must be clearly expressed; it will not be implied. Id. The purpose of the Industrial Insurance Act is to protect the public at large, not a defined class of persons. RCW 49.17.010.

Gossage v. State

49 P.3d 927 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jul 2, 2002

Gossage argues that Ford establishes that "`preferred for appointment and employment' is given its plain meaning—a veteran protected under this statute shall be selected over another qualified candidate...." … The record before us establishes that taking the entire hiring process into account, Gossage was not equally qualified to those applicants ultimately chosen for the position.

Riksem v. City of Seattle

47 Wash. App. 506 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Feb 23, 1987

The emphasis of the "trails and paths" statute, RCW 47.30, is on the establishment and planning for new trails and paths, providing funding, and preserving them once they have been constructed. … A statute cannot be judicially declared invalid unless it clearly is in conflict or violative of the state or federal constitution. Clark v.

Mark A. Hiesterman, Appellant/cross-res V. Wa State Dept. Of Health, Respondent/cross-app

Court of Appeals of Washington · Feb 22, 2023

with business expectancy, and invasion of privacy. 4 For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/. 54171-8-II established … First, Hiesterman’s claim that RCW 18.130.300 violates article I, section 8 of the Washington Constitution clearly suggests a constitutional issue.

Kevin P. Clare v. Telquist McMillen Clare PLLC

501 P.3d 167 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Dec 28, 2021

Restraint of Domingo, 155 Wn.2d 356, 365-66, 119 P.3d 816 (2005) (dicta in an opinion cannot establish a rule or principle and dispelling dictum does not establish a significant change in the law). … Clare is immune under the litigation privilege.

Bailey v. Town of Forks

38 Wash. App. 656 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Sep 10, 1984

Bailey appeals, claiming (1) the trial court erred in dismissing the action on the basis of sovereign immunity, and (2) the facts pleaded establish a cause of action for negligence. … Nor have we been cited to any clear legislative intent or clearly enunciated policy to support the existence of a duty owed by officers to individuals in these circumstances.

Story v. Shelter Bay Company

52 Wash. App. 334 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Sep 6, 1988

The burden of establishing abuse of a qualified privilege rests on the defamed *342 party, who must show by clear and convincing evidence the declarant's knowledge of the falsity, or his or her reckless disregard as to the … That decision states in part that: The defendant corporation has the burden to establish by clear and convincing evidence that there was an abuse of a qualified privilege.

Matheson v. Washington State Liquor Control Board

132 Wash. App. 280 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Mar 28, 2006

Where a legitimate public interest exists, the statute “ ‘ “will be upheld unless the burden imposed on such commerce is clearly excessive in relation to the putative local benefits.” ’ ” Id. at 832 (quoting Franks & Sons … Matheson does not qualify for this exemption. See also RCW 82.24.500 (requiring a Washington wholesaler’s license to engage in cigarette distribution in this state). ¶23 While Mr.

The Estate Of Daniel A. Mccartney, V. Pierce County

Court of Appeals of Washington · Jun 28, 2022

If these questions can clearly be answered in the affirmative, then the challenged government decision falls within the exception, “regardless of its unwisdom.” … Employer Immunity Under the worker compensation laws, law enforcement organizations are exempt from employer immunity.

Cannabis Action Coalition v. City Of Kent

Court of Appeals of Washington · Mar 31, 2014

As drafted by the legislature, ESSSB 5073 established a state-run registry system for qualified patients and providers. … with the registry established in section 901.

Yonker v. DEPT. OF SOCIAL AND HEALTH SERV.

930 P.2d 958 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Feb 10, 1997

Neither of these qualifiers necessarily means that the protected group must be small or narrow. Indeed, such is not the requirement. … The Legislature imposed a specific duty on the Department, and the Legislature has abrogated governmental immunity (RCW 4.96.010).

State v. Turner

59 P.3d 711 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jan 31, 2003

But the trial court's descriptive findings do not establish that the court required proof of these facts to establish immediate control. … Many recent opinions addressing searches of automobiles lead away from a clearly defined set of bright line rules readily capable of being applied by police officers in the field.

Avnet, Inc., Respondent/cross-appellant v. Dept. Of Revenue, Appellant/cross-respondent

Court of Appeals of Washington · Apr 28, 2015

These sales were " so clearly interstate in character that the State could not reasonably attribute their proceeds to the local business." Norton 340 U. … The Court soundly rejected this immunity in Complete Auto Transit, expressly overruling precedents to the contrary. 430 U.S. at 288 -89.