Case law

Aba Sheikh v. Choe

156 Wash. 2d 441 · Washington Supreme Court · Feb 16, 2006

We concluded the trial court correctly instructed *462 the jury that the burden of establishing the injury was segregable and that the burden of apportioning the harm fell upon the lone remaining (at-fault) defendant. … Tegman is also harmful because it prevents full and fair compensation to victims that the legislature clearly intended to fully compensate. RCW 4.22.070(l)(b).

McHugh v. Douglass

165 Wash. 123 · Washington Supreme Court · Nov 6, 1931

Barbara McHugh qualified as executrix and, as required by the statute (Rem. Comp. Stat., § 1477), she caused to be published a notice of her appointment as executrix and a notice to creditors to file their claims. … Whatever her purpose, the executrix by her notice and order clearly allowed the respondent’s claim as a valid claim against the separate property of the decedent. The order appealed from is affirmed. Tolman, C.

Hillary Buechler v. Wenatchee Valley College

Court of Appeals of Washington · Mar 19, 2013

"Exhaustion is required when: (1) a claim is cognizable in the first instance by an agency alone; (2) the agency has clearly established mechanisms for the resolution of complaints by aggrieved parties; and (3) the administrative … Azurdia were entitled to qualified immunity. 15 No.30321-7-II1 Buechler v. Wenatchee Valley Coli. (1972»).

Committee for an Independent P-I v. Smith

549 F. Supp. 985 · District Court, W.D. Washington · Aug 27, 1982

The Court held that in order to qualify as a “failing company,” a newspaper would have to have been on the brink of liquidation, would have to show that there were no alternatives to a JOA, and would have to establish that … American Press Co., 297 U.S. 233 , 56 S.Ct. 444 , 80 L.Ed. 660 (1936), relied on heavily by the plaintiffs, is clearly inapplicable.

State Ex Rel. Taylor v. Lawler

2 Wash. 2d 488 · Washington Supreme Court · Feb 1, 1940

In his application, the relator alleged that he is a resident of Seattle, King county, Washington, an elector and taxpayer therein, and a skilled and qualified court reporter. … But such a promise is clearly legally unenforceable, and cannot be said to establish a tangible, or even an inchoate, right.

Royalblood

District Court, W.D. Washington · Sep 8, 2026

It was clearly established well before September 2024 14 that a pretrial detainee could not be subjected to segregation as punishment without due 15 process. Mitchell, 75 F.3d at 523–24. … Because Ossewaarde’s entitlement to qualified 16 immunity turns on the same disputed factual question, he is not entitled to qualified 17 immunity

In re the Welfare of M.G.

148 Wash. App. 781 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Feb 10, 2009

The record also indicates that dependency as to the father was clearly contemplated. The dependency petition named both parents. … During at least one visit, on May 14, 2007, OMC records “clearly indicate” that KS did not tell the physician that she was pregnant. CP at 33.

Smith v. Department of Labor & Industries

8 Wash. 2d 587 · Washington Supreme Court · May 5, 1941

It is a well-established rule of grammar, which has been recognized and adopted by all the courts, that *592 a qualifying and limiting phrase relates only to the last antecedent; and in the statute before us, the limiting … It would be indeed a technical interpretation and strained construction, a reading into the statute of language other than that employed by the legislature, to express for the legislature an intent it clearly did not entertain

Hinderer v. Ryan

7 Wash. App. 434 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jul 28, 1972

A breach of warranty may be established without proof of negligence on the part of the defendant. … Upon retrial, if the evidence justifies the giving of both instructions, care should be given that the two warranties are clearly distinguished in the court’s instructions and the jury told that proof of a breach of one or

State v. Harris

102 Wash. App. 275 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Aug 28, 2000

exceptional sentence may be reversed only where the reviewing court finds that the reasons supplied by the sentencing judge are not supported by the record or do not justify the sentence, or that the sentence imposed was clearly … Finally, it is well established that the court is not bound by the plea agreement. See RCW 9.94A.090(2); Sledge, 133 Wn.2d at 839 n.6. 2.

Board of Trustees of Whitman College v. Berryman

156 F. 112 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Washington · Jun 4, 1907

The scope of the bill is clearly one beyond mere relief against the tax. which is mentioned. … Immunity from taxation conferred on a corporation by legislation is not a franchise; nor does such immunity pass under a decree providing that the purchaser shall succeed to all franchises, rights and privileges.

In re the Estate of Fellin

108 Wash. 626 · Washington Supreme Court · Dec 2, 1919

The trial court, after hearing, denied the petition and confirmed the previous appointment of Merritt, holding that the appellant was a nonresident of the state of Washington, and therefore not qualified for appointment as … Although our statute does not clearly establish the procedure, it must be that notice of the petition be given in order for the court to appoint an administrator and remove another who has theretofore been appointed.

Poole v. City of Vancouver

District Court, W.D. Washington · Oct 9, 2025

Defendants add that Officer Block is 21 entitled to qualified immunity because there is no clearly established law holding that an officer 22 violated the Fourth Amendment under similar circumstances. … For similar reasons to the other § 1983 claims, Defendants 4 argue Officer Block is entitled to qualified immunity because there is no clearly established right 5 at issue.

Taylor v. Washington Department of Corrections

District Court, W.D. Washington · Jan 9, 2023

21 The individual Defendants assert that they are entitled to qualified immunity defense. … For 24 1 purposes of qualified immunity, “[a] right is clearly established when it is sufficiently clear that 2 every reasonable official would

Public Utility District No. 1 v. Inland Power & Light Co.

64 Wash. 2d 122 · Washington Supreme Court · Apr 2, 1964

Eliminating the REA as a party to the amended petition may be sufficient to protect the petition from pretrial attack, but trial on the merits clearly established the interest of the United States in the property. … is established that in this particular case such payment cannot be made.

Cruz v. Ferry County

District Court, E.D. Washington · Apr 10, 2025

Ct. 729 (1975). 7 Qualified immunity protects a government official from suit for conduct that 8 “does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a 9 reasonable person would … Ct. 1350 (2011). 13 The individual Ferry County Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity 14 and thus summary judgment. There is no clearly established law that Mr.

Honcoop v. State

111 Wash. 2d 182 · Washington Supreme Court · Jul 15, 1988

The first and third elements are clearly satisfied. The Director is responsible for the enforcement of the brucel-losis control program. RCW 16.36.020 and .040. … As these decisions involve high level discretionary acts exercised at the executive level, the State is entitled to governmental immunity. See Evangelical United Brethren Church v.

In re the Recall of Carey

132 Wash. 2d 525 · Washington Supreme Court · Jul 17, 1997

RCW 35.43, however, governs the establishment of local improvement districts and therefore does not apply to this case. … to provide the services required for the proposed project” based on established criteria.

State v. Haffer

94 Wash. 136 · Washington Supreme Court · Dec 29, 1916

The malicious intention of the defendant to injure the family and posterity of deceased must be expressly averred and clearly proved.” In the leading case of The King v. Topham, 4 Durn. & East. … Judge Cooley in his Constitutional Limitations (7th ed.), p. 46, observes: “It is to be observed of this instrument, that being framed for the establishment of a national government, it is a settled rule of construction that

Smith v. Board County Com'rs Skagit County

45 F. 725 · U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Washington · Mar 13, 1891

against injuries which may reasonably be expected to result from official recognition of the election as if it were valid; and upon principle it appears to me that the facts alleged in the plaintiff’s bill bring the case clearly … within the well-established rules of equity by which such relief is always granted.