Case law

Leinum v. Continental Casualty Co.

2 Wash. App. 233 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Apr 2, 1970

or employment for wage or profit for which he was, on or before the date 1 of injury reasonably qualified by reason of education, training or experience. … Co., 67 Wn.2d 60 , 406 P.2d 628 (1965) where the term “any occupation” clearly means considerably more than his regular and customary occupation.

Bower v. Bower

5 Wash. 225 · Washington Supreme Court · Nov 18, 1892

Such being the object of our statute, it is contended on the part of the respondent that the will can be sustained if it is made clearly to appear to the court, either by the terms of the will itself or by satisfactory proof … clauses to the absolute language before used that the present rule of decision was established.

Guard v. Jackson

132 Wash. 2d 660 · Washington Supreme Court · Jul 24, 1997

Beeston and Guard never married, but Beeston's paternity of Jeffrey was established by a paternity action in 1990. … A mother (married or unmarried) risks her life to bear the child and therefore qualifies. ...

O'Meara v. Washington State Board Against Discrimination

58 Wash. 2d 793 · Washington Supreme Court · Sep 29, 1961

established by the way the act itself defines the phrase publicly-assisted housing. … But the second proposition is qualified by limitations which compound the difficulties of one who assails the legislative decision.

State v. Carmen

77 P.3d 368 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Oct 6, 2003

The admissibility of the documents turned on whether the convictions so established qualified as predicate convictions for purposes of RCW 26.50.110(5). … These are clearly questions for the court and not the jury.

Henry v. Washington Department of Health

District Court, E.D. Washington · Mar 29, 2024

immunity grounds—namely, that they did not violate any 8 clearly established First Amendment right. … Clearly Established Law 5 Next, Defendants argue that the Individual Defendants are entitled to qualified 6 immunity because it was not clearly established under the law at the

Young v. Pena

District Court, W.D. Washington · Aug 6, 2019

immunity: Police officers 4 “generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not 5 violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person 6 … the right at issue was “clearly established” at the time the defendant engaged 10 in the misconduct.

State v. Carmen

118 Wash. App. 655 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Oct 6, 2003

The admissibility of the documents turned on whether the convictions so established qualified as predicate convictions for purposes of RCW 26.50.110(5). … These are clearly questions for the court and not the jury.

Washington Kelpers Ass'n v. State

81 Wash. 2d 410 · Washington Supreme Court · Nov 14, 1972

The legislature has established license requirements for all segments of the commercial fishery. … Clearly, RCW 75.12.650 applies equally to all persons within the statutory class.

Pleasant v. State of Washington

District Court, E.D. Washington · Mar 31, 2025

“To determine whether an officer is entitled to 2 qualified immunity, the Court asks, in the order it chooses, (1) whether the alleged 3 misconduct violated a constitutional right and (2) whether the right was clearly … Therefore, law enforcement officers generally have qualified 17 immunity when acting pursuant to a warrant. See id. at 555-56.

Zarate v. Effland

District Court, E.D. Washington · Apr 23, 2024

As such, Plaintiff has not established causation and she has 16 failed to state a deliberate fabrication of evidence claim. 17 Lastly, Defendants appear to be entitled to qualified immunity. … show Defendants’ conduct violated a constitutional right; 13 and 2) whether the right was clearly established.

Warnick v. Washington Education Ass'n

593 F. Supp. 66 · District Court, E.D. Washington · Jun 8, 1984

ANTITRUST IMMUNITY Even if a claim had been stated, and even if the plaintiffs in this action had standing to sue, the defendant WEA is immune from prosecution under the labor exemptions to the federal antitrust laws. … Since providing its members with TSA’s is clearly in the union’s self-interest, the dispositive issue under Hutcheson is whether defendant agents are a “non-labor” group within the meaning of that case.

State Ex Rel. Fleming v. Cohn

12 Wash. 2d 415 · Washington Supreme Court · Feb 10, 1942

The debt was established by the judgment. The latter was uncontested by appeal, and the obligation is ascertained and fixed. … Clearly we think such a suit, even though brought against its officer, must in effect be a suit against the state.” In the case of Weber v.

State v. Krug

12 Wash. 288 · Washington Supreme Court · Jul 15, 1895

must set forth the offense with clearness and all necessary certainty to apprise the accused of the crime with which he stands charged, and that every ingredient of which the offense was composed must be accurately and clearly … They lack the certainty and precision required by the established rules of criminal pleading.”

Allen

District Court, W.D. Washington · Jan 14, 2026

has not shown that the Court’s 12 determinations on his ADA single cell accommodation and wheelchair access claims 13 against DOC were manifest error, or that it erred in concluding that Kaehler is qualifiedly 14 immune … Allen has not cited a “robust consensus” of persuasive authority 18 clearly establishing an unqualified right to a wheelchair in the circumstances he alleges, 19 leaving Kaehler entitled to qualified immunity.

Cockrum v. C.H. Murphy/Clark-Ullman, Inc.

Washington Supreme Court · May 29, 2025

An exception to employer immunity is for deliberate injury. RCW 51.24.020. … The legislature did not grant immunity to employers who injured employees intentionally.

State v. Fields

85 Wash. 2d 126 · Washington Supreme Court · Jan 10, 1975

Clearly CrR 2.3(b) authorizes the issuance of a search warrant in a substantially broader class of crimes than does RCW 10.79.015. … They have no constitutional right to be immune from a reasonable search and seizure under a warrant issued upon probable cause as to any particular class of crime.

Crown Zellerbach Corp. v. State

45 Wash. 2d 749 · Washington Supreme Court · Dec 16, 1954

It is the measure of the tax, rather than subject matter, which violates the constitutional immunity of interstate commerce.” … Evatt, supra, it was said (p. 420): “It has long been established that a state can tax the business of manufacturing.

Language Connection, LLC v. Employment Security Department

149 Wash. App. 575 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Apr 13, 2009

To qualify as an “employer,” an entity must have persons in “employment.” RCW 50.04.080. … Once it is established that an entity has persons in employment, then the entity qualifies as an employer and it will be liable for contributions unless it can prove that an exemption applies.

Richey v. Stemler

District Court, W.D. Washington · Feb 1, 2021

The R&R applied the two- 25 part test for qualified immunity articulated in Saucier v. Katz, 533 U.S. 194, 201 (2001). 26 Id. … Thus, the Court must resolve the 20 issue of qualified immunity as a matter of law. 21 “For purposes of qualified immunity, we resolve all factual disputes in favor of the 22 party