Case law

Protect Whatcom Kids, V. Tim Koetje

Court of Appeals of Washington · Apr 6, 2026

The operative Initiative language states this purpose even more clearly than the initiative in Ruano: “THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the citizens of Whatcom County that Ordinance 2022-045 (Proposition 5) be repealed.” … “Failure to establish any one of these requirements results in a denial of the injunction.” Id.

In Re The Matter Of Thomas J. Winter v. Morris A. Winter

Court of Appeals of Washington · Mar 30, 2020

And his attorney is letting me know clearly she doesn’t have the ability to rely on his direction. It’s not even clear that he’s giving her any direction here. … CR 60(b)(4) A party seeking to vacate a judgment under CR 60(b)(4) must establish by clear and convincing evidence that the fraudulent conduct or misrepresentation caused the entry of the judgment such that the

State Of Washington v. Charles R. Gotcher

Court of Appeals of Washington · Feb 23, 2016

And so therefore, I believe, Counsel, [ Gotcher] doesn’ t qualify for this Court to be more lenient than what the standard ranges are, because it’s— I’m placed in the position of, I didn’ t do anything wrong … Second, Gotcher cannot show the required level of prejudice to establish a Brady violation.

State Of Washington, V. Jacob Timothy Clement

Court of Appeals of Washington · Mar 21, 2022

In light of that established authority, we affirm. … -7- No. 82476-7-I/8 Therefore, a qualifying “fine” for excessive fines purposes is a payment to a sovereign as punishment for an offense. Id.

City Of Vancouver, V Albert George Mcclure

Court of Appeals of Washington · Dec 10, 2013

T agree that there was overwhelming, untainted evidence establishing that Hamilton was - actually afraid. … Accordingly, there is not untainted evidence that establishes an essential element of stalking. C.

Joyce v. Department of Corrections

116 Wash. App. 569 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Mar 11, 2003

The law has not established a cause of action for negligent supervision of persons on community supervision under the Sentencing Reform Act of 1981 (SRA), chapter 9.94A RCW. Compare Bell v. … And there is no recognized field of experts qualified to give an opinion predicting what a judge will do at the end of a particular adversarial hearing. Thus, Stough’s testimony was purely speculative.

Mario Noyola v. Dep't of Corrections

Court of Appeals of Washington · Jun 24, 2025

We cannot adjudge whether any of the intercepted photographs qualify as a security risk or qualify as sexually explicit in violation of DOC policy. … The court observed that the statute did not expressly establish de novo review on appeal.

Sean Kuhlmeyer v. Isabelle Kuhlmeyer

Court of Appeals of Washington · Mar 8, 2021

erroneous and the application of the [law of the case] doctrine would result in manifest injustice,” Folsom, 111 Wn.2d at 264, Sean fails to show that Kuhlmeyer I was clearly erroneous or that manifest injustice results … , Sean told the trial court, “I need this finding of in forma pauperis as a way of lightening the financial load on me, in the hopes that I can either begin to financially recover, or, that enough time passes so I can qualify

Earl Iddings v. Michael & Sue Griffith, Et Ux

Court of Appeals of Washington · Feb 20, 2014

A common law dedication arises where there is "( 1) an intention on the part of the owner to devote his land, or an easement in it, to a public use, followed by some act or acts clearly and unmistakably … Iddings argues that Dewatto Beach Drive qualifies as a county road and therefore must have a width of 30 feet from the center line.

State of Washington v. Louis L. Hanson, aka Louis Montoya

Court of Appeals of Washington · Mar 21, 2023

A reasonable reading of the judgment and sentence shows an intent that, as a result of the one conviction marked with a “1” and the three convictions marked with a “2,” Louis Montoya qualified as a persistent offender. … The defendant bears the burden to establish same criminal conduct. State v. Graciano, 176 Wn.2d 531, 539, 295 P.3d 219 (2013).

Estate Of David Lynch, App V. Washington Healthcare Authority, Resp

Court of Appeals of Washington · Nov 14, 2023

Specifically, the Estate argues that the Review Judge erred in determining that AA and UME benefits qualified as third party resources. … The Estate argues that “[s]tanding under RCW 34.05.530 is determined by review of the person who filed the petition for judicial review,” and that it should not matter if a petitioner who clearly has standing passes away

In Re The Dependency Of J.a.j., Patricia Dimitry v. Dshs

Court of Appeals of Washington · Jun 25, 2018

. ; and (f) That the continuation of the parent and child relationship clearly diminishes the child's prospects for early integration into a stable and permanent home. … Rybicki, a licensed and forensic psychologist, was not qualified to offer an opinion on the methodology of a psychiatric nurse practitioner. After hearing extensive testimony about Dr.

Linda Yeager v. John O'keefe

Court of Appeals of Washington · Mar 7, 2017

Whether a person qualifies as an expert witness is left to the discretion of the trial court and will not be disturbed absent a manifest abuse of discretion. … Yeager described Kedar as her treating physician, not a retained expert; however, the elicited testimony clearly showed Kedar provided a causation opinion specifically relating an injury or condition caused by the car accident

V.s. Investment Assoc., Llc, V. Level Capital, Llc

Court of Appeals of Washington · May 11, 2026

To establish a prima facie credit discrimination claim, the plaintiff can show: (1) plaintiff was a member of a protected class; (2) plaintiff applied for credit from defendants; (3) plaintiff was qualified for the credit … The trial court must make findings of fact and conclusions of law to establish the appropriate record for review. Id. at 435.

In Re The Detention Of Troy Belcher

196 Wash. App. 592 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Oct 4, 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.

State Of Washington v. Sebastian Guajardo

Court of Appeals of Washington · Oct 28, 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.

John J. Hadaller v. Mayfield Cove Estates Homeowners Assoc.

Court of Appeals of Washington · Jan 24, 2017

To qualify under this exception, a homeowners’ association must give notice “within thirty days from the date the association learns of a new owner, but in all cases the notice must be given prior to the initiation of a … Despite this, Hadaller does not cite a controlling change in precedent, and he does not argue that our decision was clearly erroneous.

Dorothy L. Payne, App. v. Medtronic Inc. Medtronic Xomed, Inc., Res.

Court of Appeals of Washington · Sep 28, 2015

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. RS. Inc., 143 Wn.2d 81, 91, 18 P.3d 558 (2001).

Kenneth Taylor Curry, V. Vancouver Housing Authority

Court of Appeals of Washington · Jun 14, 2022

However, regardless of the merits of Curry’s contract claim, his claim for breach of contract is clearly not barred by the statute of limitations. … First, the prosecution in this case would impair the rights established in the federal suit.

State of Washington v. John Edward Roach

Court of Appeals of Washington · Feb 3, 2026

properly addressed an ineffective assistance of counsel claim by relying on evidence that was not properly presented and by disregarding the lower court’s conclusion regarding whether a forensic expert was a properly qualified … But the mere absence of physical or scientific evidence is not enough to establish that the evidence was insufficient to support the convictions.