Case law

Department of Social & Health Services v. Stratmeyer

46 Wash. App. 748 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Feb 9, 1987

The provision does no more than establish who has standing to challenge those proceedings. Furthermore, de novo review of such matters is contrary to Washington law. See Todd v. … The court concluded that these were "qualified expert witnesses" for the purposes of the ICWA. Fisher , at 553. Elaine Fiddler was well qualified within the meaning of the statute.

New West Fisheries, Inc. v. Department of Revenue

106 Wash. App. 370 · Court of Appeals of Washington · May 18, 2001

In this case, the purpose is clearly for unemployment and workers’ compensation and the Department of Revenue rightfully denied the credits. … To qualify for a credit, the owner of the enhanced food fish must have documentation showing a tax was paid in another jurisdiction. RCW 82.27.040 (emphasis added).

Aberdeen Aerie No. 24 of Fraternal Order of Eagles v. United States

50 F. Supp. 734 · District Court, W.D. Washington · Jul 9, 1943

I shall not endeavor to enumerate all of the elements that exist here, but the undisputed facts and admissions clearly establish the contention of the plaintiff that the orchestras, during the years here involved, supplied … That was established in this case, but, of itself, it can not be the controlling factor in the establishment of the relationship of employer and employee.

Youker v. Douglas County

162 Wash. App. 448 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Aug 18, 2011

as a matter of law with respect to a given defendant if it clearly appears that the defendant provided the prosecuting attorney with a full and fair disclosure, in good faith, of all the material facts known to him or her … App. 38, 39 , 708 P.2d 407 (1985). ¶39 Officers enjoy a qualified immunity against liability for false arrest and imprisonment.

Maehren v. City of Seattle

92 Wash. 2d 480 · Washington Supreme Court · Aug 10, 1979

Further, the case does not involve the promotion of non-qualified minority employees in place of qualified non-minority personnel. … The question of prior discrimination has been established by actual proof.

Bloomer v. Todd

1 L.R.A. 111 · Washington Territory · Aug 14, 1888

That she was then, and for more than one year prior thereto had been, a resident, and a citizen, and a qualified elector of the Territory of Washington, and had then, and for more than one month immediately preceding said … contention that the word “citizen,” before and since the adoption of the fourteenth amendment, included women, yet the authority referred to expressly declares that the right of suffrage was not one of the privileges or immunities

Baker v. O'Reilly

District Court, W.D. Washington · Apr 1, 2024

6 To defeat qualified immunity Baker must show: (1) the officials violated a federal 7 statutory or constitutional right; and (2) at the time of the alleged act or failure to act, there was 8 clearly established … Given that the law on both 12 claims was clearly established, the Court finds that qualified immunity cannot be granted 13 because the facts remain in dispute as to whether Defendants violated Baker’s right to meet with

Whatcom County v. Taxpayers of the Whatcom County Solid Waste Disposal District

66 Wash. App. 284 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jul 6, 1992

The constitution clearly permits the Legislature to delegate the power to "other municipal corporations" to assess and collect taxes. Const. art. 11, § 12. … To establish a violation of the equal protection clause, "a party must first establish that the challenged act treats unequally two similarly situated classes of people." Cosro, 107 Wn.2d at 760 .

Hindman v. Boyd

42 Wash. 17 · Washington Supreme Court · Feb 26, 1906

Clearly the statute does not intend that the council shall submit the amendment until the fact exists that the necessary number of qualified voters have petitioned. … If the findings shall establish facts showing that the petitions were in compliance with the law, then an order shall be entered confirming and ratifying the one originally *35 made.

Roberts v. Khounphixay

District Court, W.D. Washington · Oct 26, 2020

Qualified Immunity 8 Defendant Khounphixay seeks qualified immunity because “there is no clearly 9 established law that restraints cannot be used to protect an inmate … “The 11 doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials ‘from liability for civil damages 12 insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of 13 which

Clark v. Bonded Adjustment Co.

176 F. Supp. 2d 1062 · District Court, E.D. Washington · Dec 3, 2001

Witness Immunity The defendants argue that Dillin, who revealed that Bonded was attempting to collect a service fee greater than what he had actually been paid, is immune from suit based on his testimony, and that therefore … Witness immunity is simply not relevant to the issues put forward by the plaintiffs. 2.

Fair v. King County

District Court, W.D. Washington · Apr 13, 2023

“Clearly Established” Right 8 A constitutional right is “clearly established” if existing controlling precedent … Qualified immunity ensures that, before individuals face 12 suit under § 1983, they had notice (or “fair warning”) of the unlawfulness of their conduct, and 13 thus, a constitutional right is considered “clearly established

Birgenheier v. Department of Employment Security

28 Wash. App. 911 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Feb 27, 1981

Obviously, these assignments are conducted under the supervision of a qualified (certificated) teacher. … Nevertheless, Congress clearly intended to establish two different eligibility tests; one for employees who perform services in an instructional capacity (contractual guaranty of reemployment in the following academic year

Peterson v. City of Yakima

District Court, E.D. Washington · Jan 23, 2020

immunity as a matter of law under the second prong of the 21 1 qualified immunity analysis, whether the constitutional right was clearly established … Even if a reviewing court were to reinstate Plaintiff’s Fourth Amendment 13 claims, the Court finds that the individual Defendants are entitled to qualified 14 immunity because there is no clearly established authority

State v. Hirabayashi

133 Wash. 462 · Washington Supreme Court · Mar 16, 1925

affairs of said corporation including the management of the land hereinbefore described; that the defendant Nora Murphy, guardian of said minor Yoshiko Katsuno, held the aforementioned one (1) share of stock in order to qualify … theory that no subterfuge, however skillfully concealed, which results in giving to an alien the right to control, possession, use, and the enjoyment of rents, issues and profits of land *471 will be permitted to thwart the established

Shokri v. Boeing Co.

311 F. Supp. 3d 1204 · District Court, W.D. Washington · Apr 25, 2018

Plaintiff did not believe that his new manager was qualified or effective as Mr. … Defendant Had Legitimate Business Reasons for Its Actions The record clearly establishes that Defendant had legitimate business reasons for Plaintiff's 2014 PM ratings and the 2015 RIF ratings and termination.

Howell v. Spokane & Inland Empire Blood Bank

114 Wash. 2d 42 · Washington Supreme Court · Feb 14, 1990

HIV is associated with the development of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS). … RCW 70.54.120 clearly states the statute will be deemed to be effective prospectively *48 from June 10, 1971. See RCW 70.54.120.

Murray v. Supreme Court of Washington

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

Thus, it is unclear if the named judges would be immune 19 from Plaintiff’s claims for damages. 20 While judges are immune to suits seeking damages, judicial immunity does not … The amended complaint 5 must include a short, plain statement clearly stating the factual allegations supporting 6 his claims and provide clarity regarding what claims she is attempting to bring in this 7 lawsuit.

Beggs v. Department of Social & Health Services

171 Wash. 2d 69 · Washington Supreme Court · Feb 17, 2011

“A grant of immunity from liability clearly implies that civil liability can exist in the first place.” Jane Doe, 141 Wn. App. at 422-23 . … RCW 4.20.020 establishes two classes of beneficiaries. First tier beneficiaries do not need to demonstrate dependency to recover.

Foster v. State of Washington

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

, “unless the official violated a statutory or constitutional right that was 9 clearly established at the time of the challenged conduct.” … “When [the qualified immunity] test is properly 7 applied, it protects ‘all but the plainly incompetent or those who knowingly violate the law.’” 8 Hernandez v.