Case law

A.B., J.L., V. Kiwanis International

Court of Appeals of Washington · Sep 4, 2024

The court further held that the qualified immunity “is a personal immunity designed to limit an individual caseworker’s liability for damages.” Babcock II, 116 Wn.2d at 619. … And so, the court concluded that it could not extend the common law qualified immunity to the State “in the face of a statutory provision admonishing us not to construe an emergency immunity to abrogate sovereign immunity

State v. Cohen

19 Wash. App. 600 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Mar 29, 1978

When the material finally did come back, the defendant stated that the closest qualified lab for him to use was in California, or possibly in Alaska. There was no suggestion of when tests could be done. … Further, the immunity statement by the prosecutor was not bargained in exchange for favorable testimony.

Linville v. State

137 Wash. App. 201 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Feb 6, 2007

No Common Law Duty ¶17 At common law, the State was immune from lawsuit. At common law, “ ‘it is not a tort for government to govern’ ” or, conversely, not to govern. Evangelical United Brethren Church of Adna v. … The day care operators here, however, already had liability insurance from the voluntary insurance market; thus, they would have neither needed nor qualified for JUA assistance.

Towle v. Department of Fish & Wildlife

94 Wash. App. 196 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Feb 19, 1999

Although the Department argues on appeal that the record before us does not establish that Towle geared up for some other fishery, this assertion is not accurate. … The Department clearly had the opportunity to elicit any facts damaging to Towle’s explanation of his activities, but it chose not to.

L.H. v. Department of Labor & Industries

86 Wash. App. 512 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Dec 23, 1996

related to denial of that right to a limited class of persons, inheres in the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, which provides: No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities … A statute which establishes a durational residency requirement, the effect of which is to create two classes of residents otherwise indistinguishable, may impermissibly burden the constitutional right to interstate travel

Ruffer v. St. Frances Cabrini Hospital

56 Wash. App. 625 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jan 16, 1990

Only a physician or other qualified expert is capable of determining the existence of a given risk and the chance of it occurring. Shannon , at 33. … However, the established case law clearly places the burden on the appellant to submit affidavits affirmatively presenting the factual evidence upon which she relies.

State v. Castilla

121 Wash. App. 198 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Apr 19, 2004

DISCUSSION Treatment Session The principal issue here is Castilla’s contention that the evidence did not establish that sexual intercourse occurred during a “treatment session.” … The State presented evidence establishing that CNAs at NARC are responsible for “the hands-on care, activities of daily living, dressing, bathing, grooming, [and] assistance with feeding.” 6 CNAs are expected to respond to

Bunting v. State

87 Wash. App. 647 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Sep 2, 1997

In 1986 the Legislature further revised Washington’s tort law by establishing proportionate liability, making joint and several liability the exception rather than *652 the rule. … Co., 120 Wn.2d 246, 295-98 , 840 P.2d 860 (1992). 1 In this case Timothy clearly could not be a jointly and severally liable defendant without rescission of the insurance settlement and release.

Hill v. Sacred Heart Medical Center

143 Wash. App. 438 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Feb 26, 2008

Heparin-induced thrombo-cytopenia (HIT) can trigger such significant life- or limb-threatening venous and/or arterial thromboembolisms. 5 HIT is an immune-mediated reaction to heparin. ¶9 Health care providers estimate the … The issue is whether the Hills’ experts established the second element. *448 ¶25 Mr.

Tait v. King Broadcasting Co.

1 Wash. App. 250 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Nov 3, 1969

Pa. 1968) to establish the proposition he is not a public figure. The case does not apply. … The focus of inquiry is directed to establishing the state of the defendant’s mind.

Negron v. Snoqualmie Valley Hospital

86 Wash. App. 579 · Court of Appeals of Washington · May 5, 1997

It is indeed well-settled that when medical testimony is necessary to establish causation of injury or disease, that testimony must be given by a qualified person in terms of reasonable medical probability. 11 We applied … The plaintiff sought to show that the emotional distress depressed his immune system, resulting in a case of active hepatitis.

State v. Sellers

39 Wash. App. 799 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Feb 15, 1985

His attack is premised on the argument that the corpus delicti had not been established before this evidence came in, and, in fact, never was established. The contention would be well taken if the premise were correct. … However, it is not correct; the corpus delicti was established.

Hill v. Sacred Heart Medical Center

177 P.3d 1152 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Feb 26, 2008

Heparininduced thrombocytopenia (HIT) can trigger such significant life- or limb-threatening venous and/or arterial thromboembolisms. [5] HIT is an immune-mediated reaction to heparin. ¶ 9 Health care providers estimate the … The issue is whether the Hills' experts established the second element. ¶ 25 Mr.

State v. Barnett

17 Wash. App. 53 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Mar 7, 1977

The decision to not establish and maintain such a program does not deprive a prisoner of his liberty without due process of law, does not deny him equal protection of the law, and does not constitute cruel and unusual punishment … Barnett clearly qualifies as a habitual criminal notwithstanding the fact that he may be a heroin addict.

State of Washington v. Mahadi H. Aljaffar

198 Wash. App. 75 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Mar 7, 2017

I think he is sufficiently qualified to interpret in this case. Having said that, I just need to administer the oath. … While we recognize the statutory definition ~f good cause permits some flexibility, the circumstances here clearly do not constitute good cause.

O'Brien v. Tribune Publishing Co.

7 Wash. App. 107 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jun 15, 1972

The focus of inquiry is directed to establishing the state of the defendant’s mind. … A newspaper has a qualified or conditional privilege to report legal proceedings provided the publication is a fair and accurate statement of the contents and is made without malice.

Wings of World, Inc. v. Small Claims Court

97 Wash. App. 803 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Nov 1, 1999

Raising similar arguments, Wings contends that the appeals bond and other filing fee requirements affect its rights under the privileges and immunities clause of our state constitution. … court expressly rejected the argument that the Legislature’s authority to set forth the qualifications for judges in the inferior courts is constitutionally limited, stating, “Under our state constitution, the people have clearly

Hoglin v. Brown

4 Wash. App. 366 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Mar 1, 1971

It is well settled that mere misdiagnosis by a physician or surgeon does not necessarily establish liability against him. As stated in Skodje v. … A mere difference of professional opinion as to diagnosis or treatment is not enough to establish negligence.

Read v. Employment Security Department

62 Wash. App. 227 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Aug 5, 1991

See RCW 34.05.902. 4 The "clearly erroneous" standard applies to factual issues. Franklin Cy. Sheriff's Office v. Sellers, 97 Wn.2d 317, 324 , 646 P.2d 113 (1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1106 , 74 L. Ed. 2d 954 , 103 S. … decisions are: "(a) in violation of constitutional provisions; or "(b) in excess of the statutory authority or jurisdiction of the agency; or "(c) made upon unlawful procedure; or "(d) affected by other error of law; or "(e) clearly

State v. Liles

11 Wash. App. 166 · Court of Appeals of Washington · May 3, 1974

Even if Detective Bansmer did qualify as an expert, defendant contends the testimony was not material. … , or tending to establish, innocence.