Case law

United States v. Washington

384 F. Supp. 312 · District Court, W.D. Washington · Feb 12, 1974

The fishing right was reserved by the Indians and cannot be qualified by the state. … To qualify for self-regulation of off reservation treaty right fishing as above provided, a tribe must establish to the satisfaction of either Fisheries and Game or the court, that the tribe has each of the following qualifications

Ashwell Law v. University of Washington

District Court, W.D. Washington · Apr 7, 2025

time if the court determines that . . . the action 3 or appeal—(i) is frivolous or malicious; (ii) fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted; 4 or (iii) seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune … Claims are “clearly baseless” when that are “fanciful,” “fantastic,” or 10 “delusional.” Id. at 32–33 (Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989)).

United States v. State of Washington

384 F. Supp. 312 · District Court, W.D. Washington · Mar 22, 1974

To qualify for self-regulation of off reservation treaty right fishing as above provided, a tribe must establish to the satisfaction of either Fisheries and Game or the court, that the tribe has each of the following qualifications … In the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law on file herein the court has found, held and hereby confirms that the evidence in this case clearly establishes *342 that both the Quinault and Yakima Tribes for a considerable

Peelers Company v. Wendt

260 F. Supp. 193 · District Court, W.D. Washington · Oct 29, 1966

That all of the facts as above stated were found by the jury is established by the special and general verdicts. … In any event it would not require new trial unless the claimed error was clearly prejudicial.

Ewalan v. Schreiber

District Court, W.D. Washington · Oct 17, 2022

Ewalan is unable to establish that “exceptional circumstances” warrant 10 || the appointment of counsel. … Ewalan’s claims and determined that Defendants were not shielded by 10 || qualified immunity. (See 12/8/21 Order (Dkt. # 85) at 13-18, 20.)

Kaszycki v. United States of America

District Court, W.D. Washington · Jun 1, 2020

. § 40901), amended the Gun Control Act (“GCA”) and 18 directed the Attorney General to establish a background check procedure for determining … The Government cites to this and other 10 examples to conclude that “[b]ecause Congress clearly knows how to require approval of 11

Zayas v. McMullin

District Court, W.D. Washington · Jul 10, 2024

subject to sua sponte review and dismissal by the Court “at any time” to the 21 extent it is “frivolous, malicious, fail[s] to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or 22 seek[s] monetary relief from a defendant immune … Here, the Court finds Plaintiff’s complaint fails to establish this Court’s subject matter 5 jurisdiction. See Fed. R. Civ.

M.L. v. craigslist Inc

District Court, W.D. Washington · Sep 11, 2020

At this stage, Plaintiff has pled sufficient facts to 5 establish that craigslist plausibly had constructive knowledge of her trafficking. … The 11 Washington Court of Appeals held that “to establish an entitlement to an award of 12 attorney fees pursuant to RCW 9.68A.130, the plaintiff must first establish that he or she 13 prevailed in a civil action arising

Stewart v. Mason County

District Court, W.D. Washington · Oct 26, 2023

dismiss 17 the complaint, or any portion of the complaint, if it is: (1) frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a 18 claim upon which relief may be granted; or (2) seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is 19 immune … Dec. 8, 8 2006) (Muslim prisoner does not have the clearly established right to a specific halal meat diet 9 under the Free Exercise clause, RLUIPA, or Equal Protection clause). 10 Plaintiff’s present complaint

Washington Trails Ass'n v. United States Forest Service

935 F. Supp. 1117 · District Court, W.D. Washington · Jun 12, 1996

Clearly the Langille/Ju-niper Trails project does not exist in isolation if the additional proposed ORV trail projects in the area may all be connected. … The court concludes that the USFS is clearly obligated to consider the impact of proposals for connecting trails on the user allocation issue. 9 *1125 c.

Spruel v. Childrens Administration

District Court, W.D. Washington · Aug 29, 2024

subject to sua sponte review and dismissal by the Court “at any time” to the 21 extent it is “frivolous, malicious, fail[s] to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or 22 seek[s] monetary relief from a defendant immune … Thus, any amended complaint must clearly identify the defendant(s), the legally cognizable claims asserted, 26 the specific facts which Plaintiff

D'allo v. Modrijan

District Court, W.D. Washington · Aug 13, 2024

Courts in the Ninth Circuit may screen an IFP 22 complaint before determining whether the plaintiff qualifies financially for IFP status, and a 23 determination that a complaint is subject to dismissal under the statute … D’allo’s Eighth Amendment claim is barred by quasi-judicial immunity. 8 Mr.

Naini v. King County Hospital District No 2

District Court, W.D. Washington · Jan 21, 2020

are entitled to qualified 6 immunity. … Here, however, the Court is unable to resolve the qualified immunity issue 9 because it cannot determine whether the individual Defendants violated a “clearly established” 10 right unless it receives proper briefing about

Grae-El v. City of Seattle

District Court, W.D. Washington · Mar 10, 2022

Establishing that liberty interest is 2 necessary but not sufficient to establishing a constitutional violation, however. … law immunizes those who report suspected child abuse in good faith.

Groom v. Safeway, Inc.

973 F. Supp. 987 · District Court, W.D. Washington · Jul 18, 1997

As the court noted, there are many ways of establishing “significant” state involvement. See id. at 382-83. … McKnight, - U.S. -, ----, 117 S.Ct. 2100, 2104-08 , 138 L.Ed.2d 540 (1997) (discussing the historical and policy reasons behind its holding that prison guards employed by a private entity are not entitled to qualified immunity

Ali-El v. CT Corporation System

District Court, W.D. Washington · Dec 19, 2023

subject to sua sponte review and dismissal by the Court “at any time” to the 21 extent it is “frivolous, malicious, fail[s] to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or 22 seek[s] monetary relief from a defendant immune … Here, the Court finds Plaintiff’s complaint fails to establish this Court’s subject matter 5 jurisdiction. See Fed. R. Civ.

Dunakin v. Quigley

99 F. Supp. 3d 1297 · District Court, W.D. Washington · Apr 10, 2015

This number, although not enormous, qualifies under the standards described above. … Dunakin does not need to establish the *1328 precise number of class members to demonstrate numerosity. Kenneth R. ex rel. Tri-County CAP, Inc./GS v.

Moffett

District Court, W.D. Washington · Dec 23, 2025

a mandatory and sua sponte review and dismissal by the Court to the extent it is 12 frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary 13 relief from a defendant who is immune … A plaintiff can establish an FHA discrimination claim under a theory of 7 disparate treatment or disparate impact. Harris v.

Murray v. King County Court

District Court, W.D. Washington · Aug 13, 2024

To state a claim of disability discrimination under Title 12 II of the ADA, Murray must show that “(1) [s]he is a qualified individual with a 13 disability; (2) [s]he was either excluded from participation in or denied … Thus, any amended complaint 14 must not cross-reference her previous complaints, and must clearly 15

Jackson v. King County

District Court, W.D. Washington · Jan 18, 2022

Plaintiffs’ claims would have had to survive qualified immunity, which protects 22 government officials from civil liability where, perhaps as here, “their conduct does not violate 23 clearly established statutory or … As the Supreme Court has repeatedly 1 noted, “qualified immunity protects ‘all but the plainly incompetent or those who knowingly 2 violate the law[,]’” Mullenix v.