Case law

Michael Michelbrink, Jr. v. Washington State Patrol

191 Wash. App. 414 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Nov 24, 2015

But because the legislature intended to immunize employers from civil suits for workplace injuries, the IIA established a general prohibition on all civil suits for damages arising out of workplace injuries, with only a … Thus, our Supreme Court clearly established that every element of the deliberate intention exception should be interpreted narrowly.

Momah v. Bharti

144 Wash. App. 731 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Apr 28, 2008

Once the plaintiff has established a prima facie case of defamation, the defendant can raise either an absolute or qualified privilege to defend against liability for defamatory statements. See Bender v. … “An absolute privilege or immunity is said to absolve the defendant of all liability for defamatory statements.

Loeffelholz v. CITIZENS FOR LEADERS

82 P.3d 1199 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Mar 2, 2004

The second is that the defendant prevail by establishing immunity. … Nor will the record support a finding that $50,000 was reasonably incurred to establish a single defense (immunity) to a single claim (the IA defamation claim).

Gamboa v. Clark

180 Wash. App. 256 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Mar 25, 2014

No Washington decision has ever examined the scope of unobjected-to use that is “otherwise explained” and therefore immune from the shifting presumption. … But the qualifier is reasonably read as contemplating exceptions like the exception for vacant land that was relevant in Northwest Cities.

Tekoa Construction, Inc. v. City of Seattle

56 Wash. App. 28 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Nov 13, 1989

The ordinance expressly provides that "removal of all or any part of a principal structure or destruction by fire or act of nature on or after the effective date of this Ordinance, shall not qualify the lot for the minimum … In Washington, an approved plat is immune from zoning changes for a period of 5 years from the date of filing the final plat. RCW 58.17.170.

State v. Nixon

10 Wash. App. 355 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Dec 28, 1973

The supervisors consider whether the habitual criminal status can be established, the severity of the present offense charged, the severity of past offenses and the frequency of offenses. … A discriminatory purpose must be shown clearly by one claiming discrimination since such a purpose cannot be presumed. Snowden v. Hughes, 321 U.S. 1 , 88 L. Ed. 497 , 64 S. Ct. 397 (1944). See also Yick Wo v.

In re the Dependency of Q.L.M.

105 Wash. App. 532 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Mar 28, 2001

The Legislature clearly could have applied the statute only to the JRA if that was what it meant, and we cannot ignore the language of the statutory definition. … use immunity over the objection of the prosecutor.

Belo Management Services, Inc. v. Click! Network

184 Wash. App. 649 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Nov 25, 2014

Moreover, the broadcasters failed to establish the requirements for an injunction under the PRA. … Public Interest ¶29 Tacoma News asserts that the broadcasters failed to demonstrate that disclosure would clearly not be in the public’s interest.

Humes v. Fritz Companies, Inc.

125 Wash. App. 477 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jan 31, 2005

But the Price decision makes it clear that immunity and incapacity are different concepts and that immune entities can be capable of fault. … The Tribe is a juridical being clearly capable of fault.

State v. Reed

75 Wash. App. 742 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Sep 12, 1994

Hull, 78 Wn.2d 984, 989 , 481 P.2d 902 (1971) (a police promise that a cooperative witness would not have to testify was held unenforceable because the police had no authority to grant such immunity). 2 The record is sufficient … Deputy prosecutors and special deputies must be similarly qualified.

Ferguson v. Department of Social & Health Services

41 Wash. App. 1 · Court of Appeals of Washington · May 20, 1985

It was also clearly established that the order of the termination was in the best interest of the children to permit them as soon as possible to enter into a stable family relationship. Mrs. … The cases cited by the mother, primarily from New York, are clearly distinguishable upon their facts.

Torrey v. City of Tukwila

76 Wash. App. 32 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Sep 19, 1994

It requires, among other things, that persons performing in such establishments be licensed by the City and that they adhere to certain "standards of conduct”. 2 Torrey, Pierce and Dewberry (hereinafter sometimes referred … Clearly, the Court’s inquiry was with regard to the police officer’s decision about the appropriate amount of force. None of the cases cited in Gamer involve the decision to incarcerate.

In Re HS

973 P.2d 474 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Apr 15, 1999

B.S. and L.S. are contending that they should be immunized from termination because the unavailability of a single offered service makes it impossible to prove RCW 13.34.180(4). … The term "conditions" clearly refers to present and continuing objective deficits in B.S.'s and L.S.'s parenting skills.

Osborn v. Mason County

122 Wash. App. 823 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Aug 10, 2004

The plain language of former RCW 4.24.550(6), applicable here, does not grant the County immunity from suit. Where the legislature intended to grant immunity it is expressed. … The statute clearly indicates that the County may be liable as “otherwise . . . provided by law.” Former RCW 4.24.550(6).

Styrk v. Cornerstone Investments, Inc.

61 Wash. App. 463 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Apr 29, 1991

There are two reasons the verdicts here do not qualify as liquidated sums. … Closing real estate transactions and acting as an escrow agent for a fee are clearly commercial services which would not be immune from the application of the Consumer Protection Act, even if performed by a lawyer.

Van Hoven v. PRE-EMPLOYEE. COM, INC.

234 P.3d 1183 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jul 13, 2010

CR 56(c). ¶ 14 In order to prove a claim for defamation, four elements must be established: (1) falsity, (2) an unprivileged communication, (3) fault, and (4) damages. Mark v. … Van Hoven fails to establish damages. ¶ 17 Mr. Van Hoven also asserts that Ms. Wavra had an incentive to slant the evidence in Pre-Employee's favor because CWH had agreed to indemnify Pre-Employee.

Paul Michel, Et Ano, V. City Of Seattle

498 P.3d 522 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Nov 8, 2021

Specifically, they argue an adverse possessor has actual and exclusive possession of a disputed property only when they have actual, physical possession,14 and the City “never established exclusive possession of the portions … The liberal construction required of RCW 7.28.090 reveals the legislature’s intent to broadly shield qualifying land from any form of adverse possession.

Ethan Boudreaux v. Weyerhaeuser Company

Court of Appeals of Washington · Aug 26, 2019

App. 414, 422, 363 P.3d 6 (2015) (“[Bjecause the legislature intended to immunize employers from civil suits for workplace injuries, the IIA established a general prohibition on all civil suits for damages arising out … Instead, it “ruled that the Deeters had failed to establish a prima facie case of an intentional tort by Safeway.” Deeter, 50 Wn. App. at 72.

Stenger v. State

104 Wash. App. 393 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jan 19, 2001

But Babcock discussed only the State’s immunity from liability in such cases, ultimately finding that caseworkers are not absolutely immune from such suits, reversing the trial court’s grant of summary judgment on that basis … Thus, Babcock is not relevant to the question of the State’s duty in this case although it does stand for the proposition that caseworkers have qualified immunity for foster care placement decisions and the State has no immunity

Lauritzen v. Lauritzen

74 Wash. App. 432 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jun 2, 1994

A driver of a car clearly is not in control of the surrounding streets and highways or the conduct of other persons using those streets or highways. … The Pinkins court established a balance of interests to determine if a special relationship exists.