Case law

State v. Buckner

74 Wash. App. 889 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jul 14, 1994

too lenient or clearly too excessive. … Buckner clearly committed a sex crime.

In Re Riddell

157 P.3d 888 · Court of Appeals of Washington · May 8, 2007

The trial court found that the trust's purpose was "to provide for the education, support, maintenance, and medical care of the beneficiaries" and that a modification would only "permit[] the family to immunize itself financially … They clearly intended to establish a trust to provide for their grandchildren's general support, not solely for extraordinary and unanticipated medical bills. ¶ 23 We remand to the trial court to reconsider this matter and

State v. Johnson

49 Wash. App. 432 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Oct 12, 1987

I Between April 23 and April 26, 1985, a series of four robberies was committed at business establishments in the Seattle area. … First, the identification of the defendant was clearly the principal issue at trial.

Rothman v. NO. AM. LIFE & CAS. CO.

7 Wash. App. 453 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Aug 2, 1972

. *456 [1] In the trial of a case, any circumstance is admissible which reasonably tends to establish the theory of the party offering it, or to explain, qualify, or disprove the testimony of his adversary. Robertson v. … Depriving the jury of the evidentiary value of the check so they may evaluate its weight along with all the other evidence was clearly erroneous. Judgment reversed and remanded for new trial.

Washington Ass'n for Retarded Citizens v. City of Spokane

16 Wash. App. 103 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Aug 12, 1976

I would like to qualify that by saying that . . . this group home doesn’t meet my idea of what we should be doing in the way of group homes. … Finally, the City claims the trial court erred.in concluding that the action of the council was clearly erroneous in light of all the surrounding circumstances. We agree.

Hiner v. Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc.

91 Wash. App. 722 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jul 30, 1998

Bridgestone’s alleged failure to warn of known dangers in the foreseeable use of the tires clearly occurred in the conduct of trade. … Hiner failed to establish cause in fact.

Lakeside Industries v. Thurston County

83 P.3d 433 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Feb 24, 2004

Rather the plan, together with the zoning code, specifically allows asphalt production if the project qualifies for a special use permit. III. … The language in Lutheran Day Care is clearly dicta. The Supreme Court did not decide that hearing examiners could be liable for denying a land use permit.

Lew v. Seattle School District No. 1

47 Wash. App. 575 · Court of Appeals of Washington · May 18, 1987

basis of RCW 28A.88.010, the judgment can be upheld on the basis of appellant's failure to allege in his complaint that the STA breached its duty of fair representation. 2 In general, where a collective bargaining agreement establishes … Therefore, since respondent clearly raised the defense of exhaustion below, 3 and since appellant nowhere argued or alleged either that the STA had breached any duty or that appellant qualified under an exception to the exhaustion

Gorman v. Pierce County

176 Wash. App. 63 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Aug 13, 2013

Accordingly, we cannot overturn the jury’s verdict unless it is clearly unsupported by substantial evidence, i.e., evidence that, if believed, would support the verdict. … “Abrogation of the doctrine of sovereign immunity did not create duties where none existed before. It merely permitted suits against governmental entities that were previously immune from suit.”

Grays Harbor Energy Llc v. Grays Harbor County

Court of Appeals of Washington · Jul 23, 2013

A taxpayer bears the burden of establishing a tax exemption, and we must construe tax exemptions narrowly. Bowie v. … Considered in its context,the new construction rule clearly was never intended to exempt personal property from taxation.

Martin v. Department of Licensing

175 Wash. App. 9 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Apr 30, 2013

You have the right to additional tests administered by any qualified person of your own choosing. Clerk’s Papers (CP) at 42 (capitalization omitted). … We disagree. ¶31 The Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution and the privileges and immunities clause of article I, section 12 of the Washington State Constitution guarantee equal protection of the laws.

State Ex Rel. Lige & Wm. B. Dickson Co. v. County of Pierce

65 Wash. App. 614 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jul 16, 1992

The first element was properly established. … The third element was properly established.

Molloy v. City of Bellevue

71 Wash. App. 382 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jul 26, 1993

This duty entails informing the employee of job openings for which he might be qualified. Dean , at 637. … To establish a prima facie case of discrimination, a handicapped employee must prove (1) that he or she is handicapped, (2) that he or she was qualified to fill vacant positions, and (3) that the employer failed to take affirmative

Ventures Northwest Ltd. Partnership v. State

81 Wash. App. 353 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Mar 8, 1996

911 (1990). 42 U.S.C. § 1983 A cognizable claim for relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 must allege that (1) defendant acted under color of state law; and (2) defendant’s conduct deprived the plaintiff of rights, privileges or immunities … Clearly, the Corps had a basis to deny the permit even before it received the State’s December 15, 1988 letter.

Jeffrey Thurman v. Cowles Company

Court of Appeals of Washington · Jan 11, 2024

establish under RCW 4.105.010(3) that the chapter does not apply, and (3) the responding party fails to establish a prima facie case, or the moving party establishes dismissal is warranted under the standards of CR 12( … Special privileges and immunities/equal protection Washington’s special privileges and immunities clause states, “No law shall be passed granting to any citizen, class of citizens, or corporation other than municipal

Taylor v. Bell

185 Wash. App. 270 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Dec 29, 2014

He is qualified to opine under Idaho law, perhaps New York law, but there’s no admissible evidence under Washington law for the admissibility of his opinion. … This well-established and well-regarded organization publishes reports on various aspects of opinion practice. We may affirm the trial court’s grant of summary judgment on any basis adequately supported by the record.

York v. Shows-Re

184 Wash. App. 203 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Oct 23, 2014

York clearly has set forth a prima facie case for the latter three parts. The only part that warrants discussion is the first. Mr. … York to establish a parent-child relationship with J.B.R.

State Of Washington, V William Henry Ellison

Court of Appeals of Washington · Mar 31, 2015

Ellison sang a short religious song and spoke about various topics not clearly related to the sentencing proceeding. … The record establishes that Ellison waived his jury trial rights knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently and, contrary to the allegation in his SAG, against the advice of counsel. Ellison' s claim fails. B.

Edward O. Gorre, App/cr V City Of Tacoma, Res/cr

Court of Appeals of Washington · Apr 23, 2014

' s condition does not qualify as an occupational disease. … Weinstein establish that Gorre was a former smoker.

Oliver L. Wuth v. Valley Medical Center And Labcor

189 Wash. App. 660 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Aug 24, 2015

Harding clearly asserted in his pleading that Dr. … London "has never done CVS testing and LabCorp produces no evidence to establish that he is qualified to establish the standard of care for a perinatologist working with genetic counselors....