Case law

Barrett v. Freise

82 P.3d 1179 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jan 22, 2004

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 Wash.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(1)(b)).

Birney Dempcy, Et Ux. v. Chris Avenius

Court of Appeals of Washington · Apr 3, 2017

The CC&Rs also establish an architectural control committee (ACC) consisting of one member for each of the properties. … Immunity from Liability under the CC&RS The Dempcys assert that Shannon interfered with their contract to repair the tennis court.

State v. Corrado

81 Wash. App. 640 · Court of Appeals of Washington · May 10, 1996

upset his first conviction is not an act of governmental oppression of the sort against which the Double Jeopardy Clause was intended to protect," [24] and "society would pay too high a price `were every accused granted immunity … Clearly, the exception does not apply every time a court chooses to intone "lack of jurisdiction" for state procedural law purposes.

State Of Washington v. Korey Taylor

Court of Appeals of Washington · Jun 24, 2013

While defendants have a Sixth Amendment right to choose their retained counsel, it is a qualified right. State v. Roth, 75 Wn. App. 808, 824, 881 P.2d 268 (1994). … The court did not utter the words "undue" or "significant delay."2 However, the record shows quite clearly that the trial court carefully considered several factors bearing on the significance and length of the delay: Taylor

State v. Neslund

50 Wash. App. 531 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Feb 8, 1988

In a homicide case the body need not be produced to establish the corpus delicti. State v. Lung, supra. … The State concedes that the remark is unsupported by Stafford's testimony and was "clearly a mistake" on the prosecutor's part.

Lucas Price v. Daniel Price

Court of Appeals of Washington · Apr 30, 2018

Washington courts have established two tests to define oppressive conduct. … Lucas does not establish the late disclosure substantially prejudiced his ability to prepare for trial.

Port Of Tacoma v. C.p.b.& L. Trust

Court of Appeals of Washington · Jul 8, 2014

contractor qualified to contract with the Port of the cost to the Port to ... … The Trust also argues that the environmental cleanup section of the escrow agreement was " clearly the Port' s," and, therefore, we should construe any ambiguity against the Port. Br.

Kissan Berry Farm, V. Whatcom Farmers Coop

Court of Appeals of Washington · Sep 6, 2022

No. 82774-0-I/16 warranties or other contractual commitments plainly do not qualify as requirements for ‘labeling or packaging.’ ” Id. at 444 (quoting 7 U.S.C. § 136v(b)). … Bates, 544 U.S. at 444-45, 49 (“If Congress had intended to deprive injured parties of a long available form of compensation, it surely would have expressed that intent more clearly.”).

City of Spokane Valley v. Brian Dirks, et ux.

Court of Appeals of Washington · Oct 22, 2015

Hollywood Erotic Boutique was zoned CMU, adult entertainment establishments were not allowed where HEB was located, unless HEB qualified as a lawful nonconfonning use. … A business is regulated under chapter 5.10 SVMC ifit is an adult entertainment establishment, and a business qualifies as an "adult entertainment establishment" if it operates an "adult arcade establishment."

State Of Washington v. Ricardo Liard Bruno

Court of Appeals of Washington · Nov 6, 2017

During sentencing, the trial court noted that it was restricted by sentencing parameters established by the legislature. … For example, he argues that an ordinary person cannot reasonably know whether certain materials qualified as "works of art or of anthropological significance."

State of Washington v. Joel Rodriguez Ramos

Court of Appeals of Washington · Apr 16, 2013

To most clearly explain our decision, we present it in three parts. First, we address whether the trial court's discretion on remand was as broad as argued by Mr. … Ramos were clearly ascertainable, it would have presented that evidence before now, inasmuch as the issue was first raised by Mr. Ramos in 2011.

Woods View Ii, Llc, Apps./cross-res. v. Kitsap County, Res./cross-appellants

Court of Appeals of Washington · Apr 14, 2015

WVII fails to point out what " incorrect information [was] clearly set forth" by the County. Meaney, 111 Wn.2d at 180. … That doctrine immunizes petitions to government from certain types of liability.

State Of Washington, V. Jaycee Cedric Thompson

Court of Appeals of Washington · May 26, 2026

Further, it is illogical, if not dangerous and offensive, to suggest that criminal defense attorneys are somehow immune from implicit bias or uniquely situated to be able to identify, much less remedy, discriminatory conduct … In short, the State asked similar questions of both juror 61 and juror 62 as it did of juror 27, although both of those jurors were challenged for cause after they clearly stated they could not be fair.

State v. Steen

164 Wash. App. 789 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Dec 20, 2011

To qualify for the Fifth Amendment privilege, a communication must be testimonial, incriminating, and compelled. Hiibel, 542 U.S. at 189 . An incriminating communication is “ ‘any disclosure! … The trial court’s instruction clearly communicated to the jury that it could not convict Steen based solely on his refusal to answer questions. Accordingly, Steen did not suffer prejudice. Johanson, J., concurs.

Brewhaha Bellevue, Llc. v. Wanda Montgomery

Court of Appeals of Washington · Sep 19, 2016

The sole legal question is whether Ta'ryah qualifies as a statutory beneficiary to sustain DeShawn's wrongful death lawsuit. … Whether Ta'riyah qualifies as a statutory beneficiary under RCW 4.20.020 The main issue in this appeal is whether Ta'riyah qualifies as a statutory beneficiary to sustain DeShawn's wrongful death claim.

State of Washington v. Martie M. Soderberg

Court of Appeals of Washington · Jan 28, 2020

This appeals court concluded that the wife’s intent to murder her husband was clearly established by a forged assignment of an insurance policy on her husband’s life six months before she hired a man to kill her husband … The court noted that any slight overt acts in furtherance of the intent to murder establishes the crime of attempt to commit first degree murder.

Melissa M. Norton v. Washington State Department Of Health

Court of Appeals of Washington · Feb 8, 2021

It appears no case has since analyzed whether Nguyen’s holding applies to veterinary disciplinary proceedings. 11 No. 80344-1-I/12 Board’s conclusions of law clearly state … “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.” RCW 4.84.350(1).

Personal Restraint Petition Of: Joshua Dean Mcintyre

Court of Appeals of Washington · Jul 19, 2021

McIntyre fails to establish that defense counsel’s decision against discussing inapposite cases was unreasonable. … Reeves, 591 F.3d 77, 81 (2d Cir. 2010); accord Nguyen, 191 Wn.2d at 683 (upholding a condition pairing “highly subjective qualifiers” with “an objective standard”). 8 No. 81806

Damian Schwarz v. Susan M. Schwarz

192 Wash. App. 180 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jan 12, 2016

Evidence clearly and convincingly establishes a proposition if it makes the proposition '''highly probable.'" Dalton v. State, 130 Wn. … Ordinarily, the testimony of a single credible witness can qualifY as clear and convincing 39 No. 32274-2-111 In re Marriage ofSchwarz evidence, even if the witness's testimony

Ian Munce v. City of Anacortes

Court of Appeals of Washington · Nov 7, 2023

Site-specific land use decisions authorized by a comprehensive plan do not themselves qualify as comprehensive plans or development regulations, so they are subject to review only in superior court under LUPA. … The e-mail was clearly not a comprehensive plan or development regulation by itself.