Case law

State of Washington v. Runions

32 Wash. App. 669 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jul 30, 1982

The statutes need not be identical for this presumption to operate; the presumption varies in strength with the similarity of the language, the established character of the decisions in the jurisdiction from which the language … That language is used here because its adequacy is clearly established. There seems to be little or no risk that a statute so phrased will be challenged for any defect in the scope of immunity.

Clark v. Dwyer

56 Wash. 2d 425 · Washington Supreme Court · Jun 30, 1960

There is added to chapter 15.16 RCW a new section to read as follows: “The director when establishing standards of color requirements for red varieties and partial red' varieties of apples shall establish color standards … They do not challenge the constitutionality of the 1939 act establishing such grades.

Zarbell v. BK. OF AMERICA ETC. ASS'N

52 Wash. 2d 549 · Washington Supreme Court · Jul 3, 1958

The appellant, in support of her theory that the respondent waived this immunity by asking for an immediate dismissal of the action, relies upon the case of Teater v. … Clearly, the defendant therein, by asking for affirmative relief after his motion to dismiss was denied, waived his special appearance and any right to a dismissal for lack of proper service of summons.

Jacoby v. Grays Harbor Chair & Mfg. Co.

77 Wash. 2d 911 · Washington Supreme Court · Apr 30, 1970

In order to qualify under this section an employee must have “completed at least 10 years as a Participant under the Plan.” … This booklet clearly states the conditions under which a terminated employee may be entitled to a deferred (to age 65) pension.

State v. Thomas

8 Wash. App. 495 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Mar 5, 1973

of his act, or (2) he can establish that he did not know that his act was wrong. … a defence on the ground of insanity, it must be clearly proved that, at the time of the committing of the act, the party accused was labouring under such a defect of reason, from disease of the mind, as not to know the nature

State v. David R.

148 Wash. App. 383 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jan 20, 2009

Clearly the term is intended to refer to political jurisdictions. DCS is not a political jurisdiction. *392 ¶21 It is, however, an individual. … Rptr. 2d 65 (2003) (California mental health law providing criminal and civil immunity to individuals authorized to detain the mentally ill provides immunity to hospitals and .clinics). See McDaniels v.

State v. Weygandt

20 Wash. App. 599 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jul 3, 1978

Davis subsequently turned state's evidence and was granted immunity. The jury convicted Weygandt and Polanski of second-degree murder. Defendant Weygandt alone appeals. … Ferguson, a qualified fingerprint expert in Washington, D.C., who examined and compared the fingerprints with known fingerprints of Jamie L. Grimes and concluded they were the same.

Dean v. City of Tacoma

District Court, W.D. Washington · Apr 21, 2025

No Qualified Immunity on Excessive Force Claim 17 The Court finds that Defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity on Dean’s 18 excessive force claim. … Legal Standard 20 Qualified immunity protects government officials “from liability for civil damages 21 insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established

Haberman v. Washington Public Power Supply System

109 Wash. 2d 107 · Washington Supreme Court · Feb 17, 1988

However, it is well established that futility is not established by mere approval or acquiescence by a corporation. Kaufman v. Safeguard Scientifics, Inc., 587 F. Supp. 486, 489 (E.D. Pa. 1984) ; Lewis v. … A Discretionary Immunity Discretionary immunity is a narrow court-created exception to the Legislature's abolition of sovereign immunity. Bender v.

Cummins v. Lewis County

156 Wash. 2d 844 · Washington Supreme Court · May 4, 2006

Properly, the public duty doctrine is neither a court created general grant of immunity nor a set of specific exceptions to some other existing immunity. … While the court did not use the term “public duty doctrine,” it clearly articulated its underlying principles.

Vance Lumber Co. v. King County

184 Wash. 402 · Washington Supreme Court · Nov 13, 1935

I of our state constitution, which forbids special privileges and immunities, and the fourteenth amendment to the Federal constitution, which is to the same effect. … It would seem that what has been said in discussing the first point raised is equally applicable here; namely, it is not established that King county’s ability to meet its obligations is in any degree lessened by this act

Larry Spohn, V. Department Of Labor And Industries

Court of Appeals of Washington · Dec 7, 2021

failed to establish a qualifying medical condition. … But Spohn provides no direct authority for this assertion and it is clearly contradicted by Gorre v.

Quinault Indian Nation v. Imperium Terminal Services, LLC

187 Wash. 2d 460 · Washington Supreme Court · Jan 12, 2017

Respondents’ projects clearly fall within that broad policy. … This is clearly a transportation activity that “originate [s] or conclude [s] ” in Washington’s coastal waters. Id.

Ventenbergs v. City of Seattle

163 Wash. 2d 92 · Washington Supreme Court · Feb 21, 2008

entitled to contract with whomever it chose to exercise this power. 6 The Court of Appeals affirmed, reiterating that a city has broad discretion to take action under its police powers and that solid waste collection is clearly … See CP at 447, 989. f 19 Finally, the City determined to limit the number of contractors so that it could establish uniform delivery standards, while at the same time promoting competition. CP at 1617.

Connick v. City of Chehalis

53 Wash. 2d 288 · Washington Supreme Court · Dec 18, 1958

. *290 Appellant contends that, giving this clause its proper grammatical construction, the legislature granted fluctuating pensions to qualified pensioners. … established fixed retirement benefits.

Berg v. Bethel School District

District Court, W.D. Washington · Dec 3, 2020

“Government 4 officials performing discretionary functions enjoy qualified immunity from civil damages 5 so long as their conduct does not violate ‘clearly established statutory or constitutional 6 rights of which a … Similarly, though nonbinding precedent, 11 the Northern District of California held that the law was clearly established under Title 12 IX to preclude qualified immunity for a school principal who knew or should have

City of Snohomish v. Swoboda

1 Wash. App. 292 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Nov 17, 1969

It should first be noted that the circumstances under which the firecrackers were produced were clearly tantamount to a search. … Cases, both federal and state, too numerous to require citation, recognize that the immunity is not from all searches but only those which are unreasonable.

McCain v. Dept of Corr

District Court, E.D. Washington · Sep 20, 2021

ECF No. 71 at 18. 6 Qualified immunity shields government actors from civil damages unless 7 their conduct violates “clearly established statutory or constitutional … “Only when an officer’s conduct violates a clearly established 19 constitutional right—when the officer should have known he was violating the 20 Constitution—does he forfeit qualified immunity.” Lacey v.

Chadwick Farms Owners Ass'n v. FHC LLC

166 Wash. 2d 178 · Washington Supreme Court · May 14, 2009

If those claims are valid, FHC did not properly wind up its affairs—it clearly knew of the claims at the time it was canceled. … The legislature clearly knew the difference.

In re the Personal Restraint of Stanphill

134 Wash. 2d 165 · Washington Supreme Court · Jan 8, 1998

However, the SRA ranges do not guarantee release and pre-SRA offenders must still establish parolability. … Our analysis of the ex post facto clause in In re Powell clearly illustrates this point and is applicable to the case at bar.