Case law

State v. Harris

102 Wash. App. 275 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Aug 28, 2000

exceptional sentence may be reversed only where the reviewing court finds that the reasons supplied by the sentencing judge are not supported by the record or do not justify the sentence, or that the sentence imposed was clearly … Finally, it is well established that the court is not bound by the plea agreement. See RCW 9.94A.090(2); Sledge, 133 Wn.2d at 839 n.6. 2.

Hillary Buechler v. Wenatchee Valley College

Court of Appeals of Washington · Mar 19, 2013

"Exhaustion is required when: (1) a claim is cognizable in the first instance by an agency alone; (2) the agency has clearly established mechanisms for the resolution of complaints by aggrieved parties; and (3) the administrative … Azurdia were entitled to qualified immunity. 15 No.30321-7-II1 Buechler v. Wenatchee Valley Coli. (1972»).

Kimmel v. Crowley Maritime Corp.

23 Wash. App. 78 · Court of Appeals of Washington · May 10, 1979

With respect to employment, the legislature's clearly expressed intent was to ensure that, to the maximum practicable extent, handicapped but qualified persons would have the right to employment. … In concluding that Crowley's refusal to hire Kimmel was sanctioned by RCW 49.60.180(1), the trial judge did not clearly distinguish between the two provisions of the statute.

State v. Serrano

95 Wash. App. 700 · Court of Appeals of Washington · May 18, 1999

Certified or qualified? THE INTERPRETER: Qualified, Your Honor. THE COURT: Thank you. … The “clearly erroneous” standard of review applies.

In re the Welfare of M.G.

148 Wash. App. 781 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Feb 10, 2009

The record also indicates that dependency as to the father was clearly contemplated. The dependency petition named both parents. … During at least one visit, on May 14, 2007, OMC records “clearly indicate” that KS did not tell the physician that she was pregnant. CP at 33.

Keates v. City of Vancouver

73 Wash. App. 257 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Mar 8, 1994

Keates clearly was a possible suspect. … Our courts have, heretofore, required plaintiffs to pass a 3-pronged test to qualify under this exception.

State v. Hoeldt

139 Wash. App. 225 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jun 12, 2007

The police officer’s testimony more than adequately establishes the State’s theory. … App. 263, 272 , 72 S.W.3d 907 (2002) (holding that where a dog is clearly capable of physical harm, the fact finder could reasonably infer that it was used as a deadly weapon); Morris v.

State Of Washington v. Ken v. Wu

431 P.3d 1070 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Dec 17, 2018

In each case, the defendants argued that the record of the prior conviction for vehicular assault did not clearly show the offense was committed by the means requiring proof of operating under the influence. … The additional fact necessary to make a prior reckless driving conviction qualify as a “prior offense” can be established by jury fact-finding, as the defendant proposed in Mullen and as Wu proposed in the present case.

State v. Hoeldt

160 P.3d 55 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jun 12, 2007

The police officer's testimony more than adequately establishes the State's theory. … App. 263, 272 , 72 S.W.3d 907 (2002) (holding that where a dog is clearly capable of physical harm, the fact finder could reasonably infer that it was used as a deadly weapon); Morris v.

Strand v. Department of Motor Vehicles

8 Wash. App. 877 · Court of Appeals of Washington · May 7, 1973

Such officer shall inform the person of his right to refuse the test, and of his right to have additional tests administered by any qualified person of his choosing as provided in RCW 46.61.506. … We are unable to tell from the trial court’s findings if the driver clearly manifested confusion to the officer 'and was denied clarification.

Singer v. Hara

11 Wash. App. 247 · Court of Appeals of Washington · May 20, 1974

The Supreme Court, noting that “the fact of equal application does not immunize the statute from the very heavy burden of justification which the Fourteenth Amendment has traditionally required of state statutes drawn according … to enter into the relationship not only is clearly implied from such cases, but also was deemed by the court ip each case to be so obvious as not to require recitation.

State Of Washington, Appellant/cross-resp v. Cory Pratt, Resp./cross-appellant

454 P.3d 875 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Dec 17, 2019

It argues that Pratt did not qualify for this sentencing option because he did not have the required statutory connection with the victim to qualify for a SSOSA sentence. … We conclude the word “established” modifies both “relationship” and “connection,” meaning that the statute requires an “established relationship with” or an “established connection to” the victim.

Mason v. King County

134 Wash. App. 806 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Aug 28, 2006

A court may grant relief on a land use decision only if the party seeking *810 relief has carried the burden of establishing that one of the following standards is met: (a) The body or officer that made the land use decision … We will not reverse the land use decision of a local governmental entity unless we find that its application of law to the facts was clearly erroneous. Citizens, 106 Wn. App. at 473 . II.

State v. Mark

23 Wash. App. 392 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jun 28, 1979

WAC 360-16-260(2) does not purport to constrict the scope of the statute by equating confidentiality with immunity from judicial inquiry or process. … App. 39 , 596 P.2d 1050 (1979) is clearly distinguishable. Affirmed. Farris and Dore, JJ., concur. Reconsideration denied July 2, 1979.

HomeStreet, Inc. v. Department of Revenue

139 Wash. App. 827 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jul 24, 2007

established that the income in question was withheld from and related to the borrower’s interest payments. … And, in servicing retained sales, HomeStreet retains only the right to provide loan servicing for the purchaser of the loan and to be compensated for those services. 21 Although Home-Street has clearly established that servicing

State v. Altum

47 Wash. App. 495 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Apr 27, 1987

excessive or clearly too lenient. … This evidence establishes that Stallone had the capacity to *506 conform his actions to the law.

Xenith Group, Inc. v. Department of Labor & Industries

167 Wash. App. 389 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Mar 26, 2012

All Xenith providers signed paperwork that clearly stated they were independent contractors, not employees. ¶5 The IAJ recommended reversing the assessment. … It also determined Xenith failed to establish several of the six elements of the test for excluding coverage for certain independent contractors.

Webb v. Neuroeducation Inc., PC

88 P.3d 417 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Apr 22, 2004

Webb used the term "believe" multiple times, to guess at things he clearly could not know. For example, Mr. Webb related he believed Ms. Ellis gave misinformation to Dr. … Chupurdia appropriately did not assert a statutory immunity defense.

Multicare Health System v. Department of Social & Health Services

173 Wash. App. 289 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jan 29, 2013

One Medicaid program is the MN program for low-income families. ¶4 To qualify for the MN program, a family’s income has to be less than a certain amount established by regulations (called the “medically needy income level … And the federal regulations clearly contemplate that the Department can adjust the Hospital’s charges based on the spenddown, providing that “States must reduce the amount of provider charges that would otherwise be reimbursable

State v. Modest

88 Wash. App. 239 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Oct 7, 1997

The determination of who qualifies as a guardian depends on the facts and circumstances of each case. Wood, 52 Wn. App. at 163 . … Clearly a telephone bill is not an assertive statement and is not excludable as hearsay.