Case law

Linville v. State

137 Wash. App. 201 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Feb 6, 2007

No Common Law Duty ¶17 At common law, the State was immune from lawsuit. At common law, “ ‘it is not a tort for government to govern’ ” or, conversely, not to govern. Evangelical United Brethren Church of Adna v. … The day care operators here, however, already had liability insurance from the voluntary insurance market; thus, they would have neither needed nor qualified for JUA assistance.

State v. Murray

190 Wash. 2d 727 · Washington Supreme Court · May 17, 2018

. ¶ 6 On appeal, Murray challenged his exceptional sentence, arguing that it was clearly excessive because of his brain injury. … Under current law, the court or jury can make a special finding regarding deadly weapon use, and the Task Force recommends a similar provision be established for felonies with a sexual motivation.

Towle v. Department of Fish & Wildlife

94 Wash. App. 196 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Feb 19, 1999

Although the Department argues on appeal that the record before us does not establish that Towle geared up for some other fishery, this assertion is not accurate. … The Department clearly had the opportunity to elicit any facts damaging to Towle’s explanation of his activities, but it chose not to.

Waite v. Whatcom County

54 Wash. App. 682 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jul 10, 1989

Frey's daily inspection record clearly states that the furnace was a liquid propane furnace. … The Director of the Public Works Department, Paul Rushing, testified by deposition that he considered Frey a qualified inspector.

North Springs Water Co. v. City of Tacoma

47 L.R.A. 214 · Washington Supreme Court · Oct 9, 1899

, operating and controlling the same by the city, and all such appropriations shall be made as provided in this article, except that before passing the resolution provided for, the city council shall first submit to the qualified … : “No law shall be passed granting to any citizen, class of citizens, or corporation other than municipal, privileges or immunities which, upon the same terms, shall not equally belong to all citizens or corporations.”

Department of Social & Health Services v. T.P.

182 Wash. 2d 689 · Washington Supreme Court · Feb 19, 2015

A court can order termination if it finds “[t]hat continuation of the parent and child relationship clearly diminishes the child’s prospects for early integration into a stable and permanent home.” … Even so, the trial court found that the appointed guardians were qualified, appropriate, and capable of being A.W. and M.W.’s guardians. T.R did not contest this finding.

Linville v. State

151 P.3d 1073 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Feb 6, 2007

No COMMON LAW DUTY ¶ 17 At common law, the State was immune from lawsuit. At common law, "it is not a tort for government to govern" or, conversely, not to govern. Evangelical United Brethren Church v. … The daycare operators here, however, already had liability insurance from the voluntary insurance market; thus, they would have neither needed nor qualified for JUA assistance.

Midmountain Contractors Inc. v. American Safety Indemnity Co.

893 F. Supp. 2d 1096 · District Court, W.D. Washington · Sep 5, 2012

Indeed, even if MidMountain had a duty to ensure that Mattila included King County as an additional insured, such an allegation does not clearly and unambiguously establish that Mattila entered into a legally enforceable … The Cross-Claim Exclusion, however, clearly and unambiguously includes Additional Insureds who qualify as such based on a legally enforceable contract and are therefore included in the amended definition of “insureds” provided

State ex rel. Hubbard v. Lindsay

52 Wash. 2d 397 · Washington Supreme Court · May 22, 1958

In the present case, we are concerned not only with the qualifications of a qualified elector but more particularly with the method prescribed by the legislature for publicly establishing the fact that a certain citizen possesses … This distinction was clearly pointed out by this court in State ex rel. Carroll v.

L.H. v. Department of Labor & Industries

86 Wash. App. 512 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Dec 23, 1996

related to denial of that right to a limited class of persons, inheres in the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, which provides: No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities … A statute which establishes a durational residency requirement, the effect of which is to create two classes of residents otherwise indistinguishable, may impermissibly burden the constitutional right to interstate travel

Bair v. Snohomish County

District Court, W.D. Washington · Feb 2, 2021

immunity protects government officials from liability 12 for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or 13 … clearly established right of pre-trial detainees to sufficient medical care.

Neth v. General Electric Co.

65 Wash. 2d 652 · Washington Supreme Court · Feb 16, 1965

Defendant clearly advised clerical employees at HAPO not represented by a union, including plaintiff Ada *655 Neth, of the procedures defendant had established affording them an opportunity to be heard in the event such employee … In our opinion, their context clearly shows that the statements were not promises but employer opinions which were clearly expressed as such by the employer.

Durant v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.

419 P.3d 400 · Washington Supreme Court · Jun 7, 2018

First, it establishes that an injured worker has a "fixed and stable" impairment, thereby triggering disability benefits. See id. at 28; see also WAC 296-20-200(4). … The OIC does not clearly articulate what language or conditions might meet these requirements.

Ruffer v. St. Frances Cabrini Hospital

56 Wash. App. 625 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jan 16, 1990

Only a physician or other qualified expert is capable of determining the existence of a given risk and the chance of it occurring. Shannon , at 33. … However, the established case law clearly places the burden on the appellant to submit affidavits affirmatively presenting the factual evidence upon which she relies.

State v. Castilla

121 Wash. App. 198 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Apr 19, 2004

DISCUSSION Treatment Session The principal issue here is Castilla’s contention that the evidence did not establish that sexual intercourse occurred during a “treatment session.” … The State presented evidence establishing that CNAs at NARC are responsible for “the hands-on care, activities of daily living, dressing, bathing, grooming, [and] assistance with feeding.” 6 CNAs are expected to respond to

W. v. Jackson

22 Va. Cir. 114 · Washington County Circuit Court · Nov 5, 1990

Each local department shall establish child-protective services under a departmental cóordi *120 nator within such department or with one or more adjacent local departments which shall be staffed with qualified personnel … From the way this sentence is written, I am unsure whether it is the staffing with qualified personnel that must be done pursuant to such promulgated regulations, or whether it is the establishment of child-protective services

Stout v. Warren

176 Wash. 2d 263 · Washington Supreme Court · Dec 20, 2012

The burden is on the party asserting that an activity is abnormally dangerous to establish a factual basis for that conclusion. See Anderson, 801 F.2d at 939-40 . … Notably, the statute does not provide immunity to the bounty hunter. On remand, CJ Johnson may assert assumption of risk or comparative fault, depending on the facts.

State v. Case

187 Wash. 2d 85 · Washington Supreme Court · Dec 8, 2016

VRP (Mar. 17-18, 2013) at 6. ¶33 The majority asserts that this stipulation “appeared to establish that Case agreed he had two prior qualifying convictions under RCW 26.50.110(5) as alleged in the charging information.” … LEXIS 5907 , at *5. ¶37 Under this authority, Case’s stipulation was insufficient to establish that he had two qualifying prior convictions. ¶38 The State has made the backup argument that Case invited this error by signing

Baker

District Court, W.D. Washington · Jul 30, 2026

The party asserting jurisdiction has the burden of establishing it. 6 See United States v. … Supp. 2d 496, 502–03 (D.P.R. 18 2008) (plaintiff referred to himself as “handicapped, mentally ill,” but “failed to establish that he 19 qualifies as ‘disabled’ within the meaning of the ADA because he has not identified

Rickert v. Public Disclosure Commission

161 Wash. 2d 843 · Washington Supreme Court · Oct 4, 2007

contain a majority opinion requiring that all of the elements for a defamation suit must be established in order for speech to fall outside First Amendment protections under New York Times. … First, it is the standard established by the Court to satisfy competing constitutional concerns.