Case law

State Of Washington v. Jorge Luis Lizarraga

191 Wash. App. 530 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Dec 7, 2015

In reaching this judgment, we establish no new principles of constitutional law. … On appeal, the court affirmed the trial court’s dismissal of a firearm charge, concluding the witness’s material and favorable testimony was clearly known to the State and the State acted in bad faith by failing to give

Lake Whatcom Railway Company, App. v. Karl Alar And Jeanine Alar, Res.

Court of Appeals of Washington · Feb 3, 2014

and expressly limits or qualifies the interest conveyed.23 The 1931 deed contains no language clearly and expressly limiting or qualifying the interest conveyed. … CONCLUSION Lake Whatcom Railway fails to establish that the trial court's decisions violated federal law.

State of Washington v. Ignacio Cobos

Court of Appeals of Washington · Sep 11, 2025

The court denied the motion because Cobos was granted several extensions and the letter from March 29, 2024 clearly indicated that it must be filed by April 11, 2024. … Furthermore, this court “will disregard defects in the form of a notice of appeal . . . if the notice clearly reflects an intent by a party to seek review.”

Schnitzer West, Llc v. City Of Puyallup

196 Wash. App. 434 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Oct 18, 2016

P.3d 25 (2007), made the effect of these provisions clear: GMHBs do not have jurisdiction to decide challenges to site-specific land use decisions because site-specific land use decisions do not qualify … Adjudicatory functions must also 16 No. 47900-1-II meet the “clearly erroneous” or “substantial evidence” tests, as well as negotiate the due process hurdles

In Re The Detention Of Troy Belcher

Court of Appeals of Washington · Nov 22, 2016

He asserted in the petition that his qualified expert, Dr. Brian Abbott, assessed Belcher as no longer meeting the commitment criteria as a SVP because of his “positive response to continuing treatment.” CP at 82. … Belcher opposed the State’s show cause petition, arguing that the State failed to “establish a prima facie case for continued confinement.” CP at 304.

Potelco, Inc. v. Department Of Labor And Industries

433 P.3d 513 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Nov 20, 2018

None of the linemen on this project established an equipotential zone (EPZ)1 around the work area. … Once L&I has established a prima facie case of a WISHA violation, the burden shifts to the employer “who can avoid a finding against it if it can establish that ‘unpreventable employee misconduct’ was the actual cause of

North Quinault Properties, Llc v. State Of Washington

Court of Appeals of Washington · Jan 30, 2017

The Nation and the State moved for dismissal based on their respective sovereign immunities to suit without their consent. The federal court granted their motions. … But to conclude that right is clearly established, the trial court would have to determine whether the State or the Nation owns the Lake.

In Re The Dependency Of: F.y.o., Michael Foster Jr. v. Dcyf

Court of Appeals of Washington · Mar 2, 2020

The Department alleged, in pertinent part, that all ordered and necessary services had been offered or provided and there was little likelihood that ~ F.Y.O. qualifies as an “Indian child” under lcWA, 25 u.s.c … C Foster next argues that the Department failed to prove continuation of his relationship with his son clearly diminished F.Y.O.’s prospects for early integration into a stable and permanent home under RCW 13.34.180

Comcast Cable Communication Mgmt v. State Of Washington

Court of Appeals of Washington · Mar 8, 2021

The State appeals. 9 Plan] qualify as an eligible refund, or require consumers to provide separate documentation of such fees. … Indeed, [t]he purpose of findings on ultimate and decisive issues is to enable an appellate court to intelligently review relevant questions upon appeal, and only when it clearly appears what questions

State v. McDaniel

155 Wash. App. 829 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Apr 28, 2010

The State has the burden on appeal of establishing that statements are nontestimonial. State v. … The gang member's statements were clearly testimonial in nature, although we do not know what he said to Miller. See Crawford, 541 U.S. at 53 n. 4, 124 S.Ct. 1354 ; Tyler, 138 Wash.App. at 127 , 155 P.3d 1002 .

State Of Washington v. Tommie Bernard Lewis

Court of Appeals of Washington · Sep 25, 2017

This court has clearly established that challenges to mandatory fees are nof ripe for review until the State attempts to collect. State v. Shelton, 194 Wn. App. … These limitations were established only with respect to discretionary LF0s.

Gamble Land & Timber, Ltd. v. Okanogan County

Court of Appeals of Washington · Jul 27, 2021

Hart is clearly an expert. … Controlling case law now clearly establishes that Washington courts’ jurisdiction has only two components—jurisdiction over the person and subject matter jurisdiction— and the courts’ subject matter jurisdiction is defined

Lingjun Steve Hou, V. Jie Yao Hou

Court of Appeals of Washington · Jul 14, 2025

. — An arbitrator directed Jie Hou to prepare a qualified domestic relations order (QDRO) splitting her Public Employees’ Retirement System Plan 2 (PERS 2) account with her ex-spouse, Steve Hou. … In full, it states, [Jie] shall prepare a qualifying “split” [QDRO] pursuant to WAC 415- 02-520 for [Steve]’s review no later than May 10, 2024.

Sommer v. DSHS

15 P.3d 664 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jan 8, 2001

At trial, Sommer presented evidence that during the two-year period, DSHS had job openings that he was qualified for, but that DSHS failed to affirmatively act to assist Sommer in locating them. … Be responsible for meeting many kinds of people, answering their questions clearly and correctly, help resolve their problems, and promote a good public image of the department.

Granite State Insurance Company, V. Pope Resources Lp

Court of Appeals of Washington · Sep 7, 2021

after the occurrence of the potentially covered event.” 146 An agreement is “‘a manifestation of mutual assent by two or more persons to one another.’” 147 Thus, the phrase “any agreement” as used in the statute clearly … Under these particular circumstances, such risk sharing and risk distributing coverage qualifies as an insurance contract.

State Of Washington, V. Rachel Caldwell

Court of Appeals of Washington · Oct 20, 2025

By this time, the State had submitted a response to Caldwell- Bash’s declaration and now argued Caldwell-Bash could not establish a fact specific claim. … Our Supreme Court established a burden shifting test for challenges to the constitutional sufficiency of predicate offenses in Summers.

State Of Washington v. Michael Jackson

Court of Appeals of Washington · Feb 10, 2015

RCW 5. 45. 020, the Uniform Business Records as Evidence Act, provides that: A record of an act, condition or event, shall in so far as relevant, be competent evidence if the custodian or other qualified … Supreme Court approved of this statute, noting that it is " clearly directed only at those convicted defendants who are indigent at the time of the criminal proceedings against them but who subsequently gain the ability

In Re The Dependency Of: G.g., Jr., Itzel Salazar-jiminez v. Dshs

Court of Appeals of Washington · Feb 9, 2015

understandably offered or provided, (4) there is little likelihood that conditions will be remedied so that the child can be returned to the parent in the near future, and (5) that continuation of the parent and child relationship clearly … White that her attorney arranged for the mother to attend CBT with a qualified therapist.

West Coast Self-storage Group, Llc V. State Of Wa, Dept. Of Revenue

Court of Appeals of Washington · Sep 2, 2025

The dictionary defines the word “directly” as meaning in a “direct manner” or “directly relevant” and the word “relate” as including to “to show or establish logical or causal connection between.” … Accordingly, only activities that are relevant and logically connected to construction qualify as directly related to construction.

Barrett v. Freise

119 Wash. App. 823 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Nov 24, 2003

To establish a legal malpractice claim, a plaintiff must establish the existence of an attorney-client relationship, the existence of a duty on the part of the lawyer, failure of the lawyer to perform the duty, and that the … State, 136 Wn.2d 437, 447 , 963 P.2d 834 (1998) (settling, released, and immune parties are not parties “against whom judgment is entered” and will not be jointly and severally liable under RCW 4.22.070(l)(b)).