Case law

Kerr v. Olson

59 Wash. App. 470 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Dec 4, 1990

The doctors contend that regardless of the contractual language identifying them as independent contractors, they both qualify under the act as "workers" and as such automatically qualify as co-workers. … We hold that the services of a physician whether engaged in the employment of the employer or working under an independent contract, which is to render personal service, qualifies for third party immunity pursuant to ROW

Gilman v. MacDonald

74 Wash. App. 733 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jul 5, 1994

The burden of establishing abuse of a qualified privilege rests on the defamed party, who must show by clear and convincing evidence the declarant’s knowledge of the falsity, or his or her reckless disregard as to the falsity … However, we note that while failure to investigate or act with reasonable grounds for belief in the truth of a statement, without more, is not sufficient to establish abuse of a qualified privilege, it is nonetheless evidence

Jarvis v. Janney

876 F. Supp. 2d 1204 · District Court, E.D. Washington · Jun 27, 2012

Qualified Immunity Defendant Janney argues that he is immune from suit under the doctrine dí qualified immunity. 6 “[government officials performing discretionary functions [are entitled to] a qualified immunity, shielding … Accordingly, the dispositive question for purposes of the qualified immunity analysis is whether the Plaintiffs’ rights to (1) advance notice of the terminations; and (2) a meaningful opportunity to be heard was clearly established

Sattler v. Northwest Tissue Center

42 P.3d 440 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Mar 18, 2002

The standard of good faith is objective; it affords immunity to qualified individuals and entities who demonstrate that they acted with an honest belief, without malice and without a design to defraud or to seek an unconscionable … We conclude Northwest qualifies as an "other person" and is entitled by statute to assert the defense.

State v. Hull

78 Wash. 2d 984 · Washington Supreme Court · Mar 11, 1971

Certainly they would not be “qualified person[s] to discharge the duties of [the prosecuting attorney].” RCW 36.27.030. … Clearly, one cannot grant or promise that which he has no power or authority to give.

Mitchell v. Board of Indus. Ins. Appeals

34 P.3d 267 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Nov 13, 2001

A statute affords qualifying veterans a preference in public employment in recognition of service rendered to their country. … Mitchell argues that this statute establishes an absolute preference for veterans who have the physical capacity to do a job.

Salim v. Mitchell

268 F. Supp. 3d 1132 · District Court, E.D. Washington · Aug 7, 2017

The Court construed a private contractor’s immunity as “qualified” and it may be. overcome “if the defendant knew or should have known that his conduct violated a right clearly established at the time of the episode in suit … Yoo, 678 F.3d 748 (9th Cir. 2012), where the court found Deputy Assistant Attorney General John Yoo was entitled to qualified immunity because it was not clearly established in 2001-2003 that the treatment which Padilla alleged

Gilliam v. Department of Social & Health Services

89 Wash. App. 569 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jan 26, 1998

ABSOLUTE IMMUNITY An immunity “frees one who enjoys it from a *577 lawsuit whether or not he acted wrongly.” 3 Absolute immunity protects the State as well as its agents, in contrast to the qualified personal immunity of … to qualified immunity for doing so).

Aldrich v. Knab

858 F. Supp. 1480 · District Court, W.D. Washington · Jul 19, 1994

Qualified immunity shields public employees who perform discretionary functions from liability for civil damages- 8 where “their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … Constitutional protection of such speech is clearly established.

Dunn v. HYRA

676 F. Supp. 2d 1172 · District Court, W.D. Washington · Nov 2, 2009

“The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials ‘from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person … Qualified Immunity Having determined that violations of Mr. Tompkins’s and Mr.

State v. Youde

174 Wash. App. 873 · Court of Appeals of Washington · May 20, 2013

Youde handed the undercover officer six grams of marijuana in exchange for *877 $90, without making any effort to verify that he was qualified as a medical user. … It is well established that a waiver of sovereign immunity must be unequivocally expressed; it cannot be implied. E.g., United States v. Testan, 424 U.S. 392, 399 , 96 S. Ct. 948 , 47 L.

Sattler v. Northwest Tissue Center

110 Wash. App. 689 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Mar 18, 2002

The standard of good faith is objective; it affords immunity to qualified individuals and entities who demonstrate that they acted with an honest belief, without malice and without a design to defraud or to seek an unconscionable … We conclude Northwest qualifies as an “other person” and is entitled by statute to assert the defense.

Demopolis v. Peoples National Bank

59 Wash. App. 105 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Sep 4, 1990

An Arizona case is instructive: As an immunity which focuses on the status of the actor, the privilege immunizes an attorney for statements made "while performing his function as such." … The burden of establishing an abuse of a qualified privilege rests on the defamed party, who must show that the speaker acted with actual malice; i.e., that he or she knew the statement was false, or had a high degree of

Forsch v. City of Kent

81 Wash. App. 270 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Apr 15, 1996

Because only the trooper remained as a defendant, the Supreme Court’s analysis turned on qualified immunity (it will be recalled that a governmental body has no qualified immunity under § 1983). … Qualified immunity serves to protect the officer on the street, not the municipality.

Davis v. State

144 Wash. 2d 612 · Washington Supreme Court · Sep 6, 2001

’s recreational use immunity statutes. … immunity statutes.

Baumgartner v. Department of Corrections

124 Wash. App. 738 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Sep 28, 2004

. ¶7 Under the exhaustion doctrine, a plaintiff must seek administrative remedies when “(1) [the plaintiff’s] claim is cognizable in the first instance by an agency alone; (2) the agency has clearly established mechanisms … And actions taken by individuals in their official capacity as state officers of the state are also immune from liability unless acting under color of law but in violation of clearly established state law. Wash.

Burgess v. Towne

13 Wash. App. 954 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jul 21, 1975

Ct. 1213 (1967), stated: New doctrines were more solidly established at common law than the immunity of judges from liability for dam *957 ages for acts committed within their judicial jurisdiction, as this Court recognized … Ct. 343 (1964), a judge who interfered with judicial proceedings after he had dis *959 qualified himself was held to be acting in clear absence of jurisdiction. Likewise, Yates v. Village of Hoffman Estates, 209 F.

Desmet v. State

Washington Supreme Court · Aug 11, 2022

, “an immunity traditionally granted judges,” when the legislature had granted only qualified immunity to caseworkers making emergency removal decisions prior to an initial shelter care hearing. … Babcock, 116 Wn.2d at 622.13 13 Several subsequent decisions have endorsed this balance of denying absolute immunity for governmental entities, like the Department, and granting qualified immunity

Brown v. Labor Ready Northwest, Inc.

113 Wash. App. 643 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Sep 16, 2002

Henson told Stevens he was qualified to operate heavy machinery. Stevens considered Henson a good worker. He asked Labor Ready about Henson’s qualifications and was advised Henson was qualified to operate a forklift. … Early Construction Co. 19 But exclusive control for all purposes is not required, as the facts of Nyman clearly demonstrate.

Spencer v. Peters

966 F. Supp. 2d 1146 · District Court, W.D. Washington · Aug 21, 2013

Krause argues she is entitled to qualified immunity because Mr. … Thus, qualified immunity is denied. E.