Case law

Citrix Systems, Inc. v. Atm Shafiqul Khalid And Xencare Software, Inc.

Court of Appeals of Washington · Dec 7, 2020

The jury’s award of $3 million clearly falls within the range of this evidence. … Its holding is clearly limited to the context of federal maritime law.

Atm Shafiqul Khalid And Xencare Software, Inc. v. Citrix Systems, Inc.

Court of Appeals of Washington · Dec 7, 2020

The jury’s award of $3 million clearly falls within the range of this evidence. … Its holding is clearly limited to the context of federal maritime law.

State Of Washington v. William Charles Horton Jr.

Court of Appeals of Washington · Jul 26, 2016

In Earls, our Supreme Court decided that the defendant “was repeatedly and clearly told of his right to have the assistance of an attorney. … Unlawful Possession of a Firearm The issue of whether or not a Florida withheld adjudication qualifies as a predicate offense for unlawful possession of a firearm is an issue of first impression.

Marriage Of Marialyce Esser, V. Gerald Esser

Court of Appeals of Washington · Aug 10, 2021

The court stated: I think based on the evidence that the court has heard so far, there is clearly enough to continue forward with the trial and that it is in the best interest of [Gerald] based … There is no evidence in the record to establish that Mari is unable to afford paying for her attorney costs and fees. Mari received all of the community properties except one.

Estate of Lorraine P. Hensley v. Community Health Association

Court of Appeals of Washington · Apr 11, 2017

Kmucha was more clearly qualified to address, submitted a detailed opposition declaration from Dr. Cruz. The estate does not contend it was entitled to summary judgment against them. … ] be deemed competent to establish the standard of care or to testify regarding a breach of that standard."

Personal Restraint Petition Of Jennifer Lynn Mothershead

Court of Appeals of Washington · May 19, 2020

Defense expert Mothershead first argues that her trial counsel provided ineffective assistance of counsel because she did not “adequately investigate a qualified defense expert’s exculpatory opinion.” … On direct appeal, Mothershead argued that “insufficient evidence supports the jury finding the aggravating factors, and the 480-month sentence imposed by the court is clearly excessive.”

State Of Washington v. Justin P. Davis

Court of Appeals of Washington · Jul 31, 2017

In his affidavit, Davis states,"The defendant should be permitted to withdraw his guilty plea since there existed only an ambiguous expression of qualified guilt coupled with as [sic] statement of facts." … possession of a firearm in the first degree. 6 No. 76747-0-1/7 Nonetheless, we note the Statement of Defendant on Plea of Guilty as well as the testimony at trial clearly

State Of Washington, V. Maurice Anthony Brown

Court of Appeals of Washington · Aug 15, 2022

At the jury panel stage, jury selection must be done in a fair way that does not exclude qualified jurors on inappropriate grounds. Rocha v. King County, 195 Wn.2d 412, 428-29, 460 P.3d 624 (2020). … Counsel was clearly aware of E.P.’s criminal history and used it to challenge her credibility at trial.

Modumetal, Inc. v. Xtalic Corp., And John Hunter Martin

425 P.3d 871 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jun 25, 2018

that although the language of the complaint did not foreclose discovery on 9 No. 76708-9-1/10 the '371 Application, and there is no surprise involved, such discovery "was clearly … Xtalic also argues that none of Modumetal's claimed trade secrets qualify as such because the information was in the public domain. But Hozeska specifically disputed this assertion.

Crown Resources, Corp. v. Dep't of Ecology

Court of Appeals of Washington · Oct 8, 2019

Crown maintains that Ecology’s regulations and formal guidance establish a two- step process Ecology must follow in establishing limits when the existing water quality is better than State water quality criteria. … Members of the Board are required under RCW 43.21B.020 to be “qualified by experience or training in pertinent matters pertaining to the environment.”

State of Washington v. Zane C. McDonald

Court of Appeals of Washington · Jul 22, 2025

He turned toward that door and just waited to be brought back, clearly 12 No. 39785-8-III State v. … Because panel members differ in what formulation of manifest constitutional error to follow in this appeal, we choose not to address whether the assigned error qualifies as manifest constitutional error.

State Of Washington v. Heath Landon McMillian

Court of Appeals of Washington · Feb 12, 2021

To establish ineffective assistance of counsel, McMillian must establish both deficient performance and resulting prejudice. McFarland, 127 Wn.2d at 336-37; Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687, 104 S. … Thus, McMillian cannot establish that a failure to make such motions was deficient performance.

Rossi Larson LLC v. Chelan County

Court of Appeals of Washington · Mar 19, 2024

Adjacent to existing, well-established neighborhoods, lower densities should be reflected, such as four units per acre. … Before a local government processes a permit application for a private land use project, the agency conducts a threshold process in order to determine whether an action qualifies as a “major action[ ] significantly affecting

State Of Washington, V. Chayce Hanson

Court of Appeals of Washington · Apr 4, 2022

“No law shall be passed granting to any citizen, class of citizens, or corporation other than municipal, privileges or immunities which upon the same terms shall not equally belong to all citizens, or corporations.” … Moreover, Hanson must establish prejudice and did not do so.

Craig's Automotive Collision Center, Inc. v. Capstone Construction Company, Inc.

Court of Appeals of Washington · Dec 9, 2025

Capstone’s failure to comply with these rules makes the trial court’s findings “‘the established facts of the case’” and verities on appeal. State v. Roggenkamp, 115 Wn. … No unfair or deceptive act or practice was established at trial by or on behalf of Capstone. The claim is for defective workmanship in a building.

Wgw Usa, Inc. And Tian Qing Guo v. Legacy Bellevue 530, Llc

Court of Appeals of Washington · Dec 28, 2015

legal conclusions" and "opinions based on speculation ratherthan evidence."10 We conclude that the trial court properly excluded this evidence.11 Expert opinions are admissible if (1) the witness is "properly qualified … A tenant in default may maintain an action for rescission if it clearly establishes such facts as would excuse performance. Eberhartv. Lind. 173 Wash. 316, 319, 23 P.2d 17 (1933).

Aloncita Monroe, App/x-resp. v. City Of Seattle, Resp./x-app.

Court of Appeals of Washington · Aug 6, 2018

Her assignment of error clearly states, "The trial court erred in denying plaintiff a new trial based on juror misconduct." The trial court's decision being reviewed is whether it erred in denying a mistrial. … employee is not able to perform the essential functions of his job, the agency's responsibility to accommodate the employee is limited to making a 'good faith' effort to locate a job opening for which the employee is qualified

Kasey Cahan, Appellant/cross-respondent V. Franciscan Health System, Respondent/cross-appellant

Court of Appeals of Washington · Jun 1, 2021

“To qualify as a public policy for purposes of the wrongful discharge tort, a policy must be ‘truly public’ and sufficiently clear.” Id. (quoting Sedlacek v. … Cahan does not clearly articulate in her briefs on appeal what she believes the relevant public policy mandates are.

TMT Bear Creek Shopping Center, Inc. v. PETCO Animal Supplies, Inc.

140 Wash. App. 191 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Aug 20, 2007

. ¶23 As herein discussed, in determining whether a defendant is entitled to vacation of a default judgment pursuant to the test established in White , the court should first inquire whether the defendant has demonstrated … However, where the actions resulting in default do not qualify as excusable, the concern is different.

State Of Washington, Resp/cross-app v. Bradley Michael Martin, App/cross-resp

Court of Appeals of Washington · Dec 16, 2019

Any remark that has the potential effect of suggesting that 6 No. 77908-7-1/7 the jury need not consider an element of an offense could qualify as a judicial comment. ki … It is well established in Washington law that “definitions” are not the same as “elements.” See State v.