Case law

State Of Washington, V. Josiah Paul Sweeney

Court of Appeals of Washington · Mar 4, 2025

Severe, Diagnosed but Untreated, Mental Illness Sweeney asserts that the trial court erred in determining that Sweeney failed to prove a schizophrenia diagnosis and, thus, erred in finding that Sweeney did not qualify … Clearly, Sweeney’s counsel recognized that Sweeney may have suffered from a mental health illness and took reasonable steps to evaluate both competency and the viability of relative defenses prior to trial.

State of Washington v. Roy Brent Boswell, Jr.

Court of Appeals of Washington · Aug 24, 2021

Because the first two are clearly not at issue, we focus only on the third exception. … Because Boswell cannot show that the unpreserved issue he seeks to raise qualifies as an exception under RAP 2.5(a), we decline to review the unpreserved claim of error. 5

Personal Restraint Petition Of Michael James Morris

Court of Appeals of Washington · Jul 13, 2015

Feldman clearly qualified as an expert. … Feldman could not establish the timing of the injury.122 Morris also asserts that if trial counsel had used the studies available on the issue of lucid intervals, "she could have established through Dr.

Tom Butler & Linda Lewis v. Skagit County & Hazel Ford

Court of Appeals of Washington · Dec 5, 2016

Also located here are provisions stating what is required to establish a reasonable use exception. Former SCC 14.16.850(4)(f)(i- iii). … The County responds that Ford satisfied the setback requirements of the code by qualifying for a variance from those requirements.

Payne v. Paugh

190 Wash. App. 383 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Sep 28, 2015

. ¶41 Medtronic argued the only witness Anderson called to testify about the design of the Laser-Shield II was not qualified and the overwhelming evidence presented by the other witnesses established it was not negligent. … The party challenging an instruction bears the burden of establishing prejudice. Griffin v. W.

State of Washington v. Avery L. Loring

Court of Appeals of Washington · May 9, 2024

Johnson’s testimony would be helpful in clearing up confusion and he clearly had the experience, training, and education to testify as an expert. … was the victim in this case, her credibility was a central issue and clearly relevant. Thus, these arguments fail.

State Of Washington, Res. v. Paul G. Jones, App.

Court of Appeals of Washington · Mar 11, 2013

-7- No. 67678-4-1/8 particular description of the items to be seized is not available at the time the warrant issues."14 Here, the detailed allegations in the affidavit clearly … sentencing condition was unconstitutionally vague.23 We also agree with Jones that condition 15, which required plethysmograph testing, is valid only if it is imposed "incident to crime-related treatment by a qualified

State Of Washington, V. Michael S. Adams

Court of Appeals of Washington · Jan 27, 2025

Careful review of the transcript of the CrR 3.5 hearing clearly establishes that FF 1.8 is not only unsupported by substantial evidence, it is directly contradicted. 2. … The jury instruction is an accurate reflection of the relevant law and established jurisprudence clearly provides that such an instruction does not constitute an impermissible judicial comment.

Duc Tan v. Le

254 P.3d 904 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Apr 19, 2011

The event, Armed Forces Day, *910 commemorates the establishment of the Southern Vietnamese Army and is typically held on June 19. … Alternatively, they maintain that even if the Public Notice's overarching assertions qualify as statements of opinion, the underlying facts used to support the claim are untrue and therefore actionable as defamation. ¶ 23

State v. Sipin

123 P.3d 862 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Nov 21, 2005

Cauthron, 120 Wash.2d at 887 , 846 P.2d 502 . ¶ 43 Although much of the evidence provided by McHenry and Allin clearly goes to the weight to be accorded Heusser's testimony, much of it also relates to admissibility of the … Fairness to the State dictates that *872 the State be permitted to try again to establish the reliability of the evidence. See, e.g., People v.

224 Westlake, LLC v. Engstrom Properties, LLC

169 Wash. App. 700 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jul 30, 2012

Factors that an obligor may consider in such a circumstance include whether the assignor wished to assign the agreement in good faith, and not as a means of avoiding obligations, and whether the assignee was a “competent, qualified … Section 10(c) of the agreement provides for attorney fees to the prevailing party in a suit to enforce the terms of the agreement “in any such action, on trial and/or appeal.” ¶102 Westlake is the clearly prevailing party

R.n., J.w., & S.c., V. Kiwanis International

Court of Appeals of Washington · Oct 12, 2021

in a conflict of interest with his contract at DLI, and that none of the DLI recipients placed at KVH 4 No. 53957-8-II received any promised training and were not qualified … A corporate officer who takes no part in a tort committed by the corporation is generally not personally liable to third persons for such tort, but “this immunity vanishes if such corporate officer knowingly participated

State v. Bander

208 P.3d 1242 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jun 8, 2009

The core concern under Frye is whether the expert testimony or other evidence being offered is "based on an established scientific methodology." State v. Russell, 125 Wash.2d 24, 41 , 882 P.2d 747 (1994). … evidence." [5] ER 702 governs the admission of expert testimony: "If scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue, a witness qualified

Brad M. Goodspeed v. State Of Washington, Dshs

Court of Appeals of Washington · Nov 16, 2015

DCS issued Goodspeed a notice and finding of financial responsibility establishing child support. … Goodspeed clearly wanted to minimize the amount of his monetary obligation to support his daughter."

State Of Washington v. Sebastian Guajardo

Court of Appeals of Washington · Sep 23, 2019

So what that means is that you right now as you sit are not qualified to serve as a juror on our case. … The trial court was clearly focused on whether the process had resulted in restoration, not whether the process was initiated by the prospective juror.

Darla Pardo v. Rco Legal

Court of Appeals of Washington · Jul 30, 2018

Pardo intended the letter to be a "qualified written request" under the federal Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act(RESPA), 12 U.S.C.§ 2605(e). CP at 1961-62. … Fannie Mae constructively held the Note through Ally while Ocwen serviced the Loan under the terms established in the Guide.

Glacier Northwest, Inc., V. Wa State Dept. Of Labor & Industries

Court of Appeals of Washington · Sep 3, 2024

As will be explained in greater detail in Part 3 of this opinion, the parties clearly contemplated disposal work at Mats Mats for the SR99 project. … However, Glacier fails to establish substantial impairment by application of the PWA.

Peterson v. Kitsap Community Federal Credit Union

171 Wash. App. 404 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Oct 23, 2012

And KCU does not explain how its “Release Fee (Reconveyance)” qualifies as a “term of repayment” under 12 C.F.R. § 701.21 (b)(1). … More specifically, KCU contends that (1) its Deed of Trust did not have the capacity to deceive borrowers about its right to charge a reconveyance fee; (2) covenant 18 of the Deed of Trust established that Peterson would

In re: H. T.

Court of Appeals of Washington · Apr 30, 2015

and immunizations. A.L.'s teeth rotted and caused her pain. On May 18,2012, the State filed a dependency petition for all three of 1.L.'s children. … The presumption shall not arise unless the petitioner makes a showing that all necessary services reasonably capable of correcting the parental deficiencies within the foreseeable future have been clearly

Tim Leo Martin, V. Marina V. James

Court of Appeals of Washington · May 2, 2022

In fact, she testified clearly and convincingly that she purchased the real estate transaction over Petitioner’s objections and criticism of the deal as a “risky” venture. … The testimony of a single credible witness can qualify as clear and convincing evidence, even if the witness’s testimony is contradicted by other witnesses. Dalton v. State, 130 Wn. App. 653, 666, 124 P.3d 305 (2005).