Case law

Ang v. Martin

114 P.3d 637 · Washington Supreme Court · Jun 23, 2005

In every situation a client should rightfully expect competent legal representation. ¶ 20 We have clearly stated the standard for legal malpractice: To establish a claim for legal malpractice, a plaintiff must prove the following … Under this logic, why not give immunity to health care providers who harm their patients unless the patient can prove perfect good health but for the negligence of the provider?

Addleman v. King County

District Court, W.D. Washington · Oct 23, 2023

The Court need not Reach the Question of Qualified Immunity. 9 The King County Defendants state that Plaintiffs cannot state a claim against the 10 individual defendants because they are entitled to qualified … To 11 determine the validity of a qualified immunity claim, a court determines “whether the defendants 12 violated a constitutional right and whether the constitutional right was clearly established at the 13 time of

State v. Pacific Health Center, Inc.

135 Wash. App. 149 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Sep 25, 2006

They claim they can help with a variety of conditions, including candida, high cholesterol, allergies, and immune deficiencies. … But they represent that they can help people with arthritis, immune deficiencies, high cholesterol, and other physical conditions.

Negron v. Snoqualmie Valley Hosp.

936 P.2d 55 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jul 11, 1997

It is indeed well-settled that when medical testimony is necessary to establish causation of injury or disease, that testimony must be given by a qualified person in terms of reasonable medical probability. [11] We applied … The plaintiff sought to show that the emotional distress depressed his immune system, resulting in a case of active hepatitis.

State v. Pacific Health Center, Inc.

143 P.3d 618 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Sep 25, 2006

They claim they can help with a variety of conditions, including candida, high cholesterol, allergies, and immune deficiencies. … But they represent that they can help people with arthritis, immune deficiencies, high cholesterol, and other physical conditions.

Geneva Water Corp. v. City of Bellingham

12 Wash. App. 856 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Mar 3, 1975

establish a nondiscriminatory classification. … There is a strong presumption that the city, in exercising this function, acts within the bounds of reasonableness, and in the absence of evidence clearly establishing that the rate fixed is unreasonable, we have no power

In Re Detention of Davis

37 P.3d 325 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jan 7, 2002

First, even though the facts alleged would, if proved, constitute a recent overt act, the sexual allegations were not established at the violation hearing. … Second, nothing was established at that hearing by proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

Watson v. Miller

59 Wash. 2d 85 · Washington Supreme Court · Nov 9, 1961

Simard, 57 Wn. (2d) 850, 360 P. (2d) 153 (1961), where we stated: "While the appellant was a favored driver, he was not thereby immunized from his own negligence. … (dissenting) I think the right of way rule as qualified by Martin v.

Cooper v. Cooper

83 Wash. 85 · Washington Supreme Court · Dec 30, 1914

That is a matter which can only come to us by an appeal from the decision of a qualified trial court. This is not a court of first instance. … We are also clearly of the opinion that the application for change of judge was made in time.

State v. Cook

84 Wash. 2d 342 · Washington Supreme Court · Aug 29, 1974

In addition, the dismissal granted here was clearly an excessive sanction, especially if the dismissal was intended to be with prejudice. See Eggan v. State, 4 Wn. App. 384, 386 , 481 P.2d 571 (1971). … the procedure for the investigation and hearing of such matters, and establishing county or district agencies to assist therein to the extent provided by such rules: Provided, however, That no person who shall have participated

State v. Clark

34 Wash. 485 · Washington Supreme Court · Apr 4, 1904

Either may waive his right to qualify or disqualify the jurors. … insanity is established by a fair preponderance of the evidence the presumption of sanity must prevail.”

Senior Citizens League, Inc. v. Department of Social Security

38 Wash. 2d 142 · Washington Supreme Court · Mar 5, 1951

The objectives of the legislation are rather clearly revealed when the entire act is read and considered together. … I, § 12, of the Washington state constitution, prohibiting special privileges and immunities.

Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District No. 1

149 Wash. 2d 660 · Washington Supreme Court · Jun 26, 2003

Affirmative action programs which advance a less qualified *663 applicant over a more qualified applicant are now impermissible under Washington law. … The School District established four “tiebreakers” to allocate students between the oversubscribed schools. 3 First, the sibling tie breaker.

Cascade Public Service Corp. v. Railsback

59 Wash. 376 · Washington Supreme Court · Jul 16, 1910

It is firmly established that any contract or agreement by a homesteader to transfer his claim or any interest therein, before final proof, except as expressly authorized by the laws of the United States, is contrary to public … The words “canals reservoirs or ditches” are qualified by the words “for irrigation or drainage across it,” and it is not claimed or pretended that the ditch in question was for either of these purposes.

Fehrenbacher v. Oakesdale Copper Mining Co.

65 Wash. 134 · Washington Supreme Court · Sep 25, 1911

Nor can we agree with the trial judge that the proof shows that the defense of independent contractor' was so clearly made out that no question of fact remained for the jury. … These qualifying facts make the case, *137 notwithstanding our belief that the judgment of the'lower court was right on the merits, one for the jury to decide. We have not referred to the testimony of the appellant.

Seiffert Co. v. Wright

108 Wash. 616 · Washington Supreme Court · Dec 2, 1919

The testimony in chief by respondent’s president has already been quoted, and this was qualified on cross-examination by the witness admitting that he testified in the suit on the bond to the effect that he already had an … We think the promise in this case is clearly distinguishable from the promise held to he an original one in Burns v.

In Re Parentage of MS

115 P.3d 405 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jul 18, 2005

In February 2003, *407 Hampson filed a petition to establish the parentage of MS. … But she declined to rule on the issue, stating "So I think the cases are clearly distinguishable, and I think the statute controls.

Reynolds v. Kirkland Police Commission

62 Wash. 2d 720 · Washington Supreme Court · Aug 15, 1963

This ordinance is clearly inadequate, if not devoid of meaning, in regard to procedure for suspension and review. … The civil service system established by the ordinance did not establish a civil service commission to conduct the investigative hearing required by statute, but, rather, established a police commission with inconsistent functions

White v. Kent Medical Center, Inc.

61 Wash. App. 163 · Court of Appeals of Washington · May 6, 1991

In sum, it is incumbent upon the moving party to determine what issues are susceptible to resolution by summary judgment, and to clearly state in its opening papers those issues upon which summary judgment is sought. 1 If … Pierson, 411 N.W.2d 92, 96 (N.D. 1987); see also ER 702 (witness qualifies as expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education).

Fernando v. Nieswandt

940 P.2d 1380 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jul 28, 1997

He also testified that guardians ad litem are generally not qualified to make recommendations for the care of a child because they have no scientific training. … The statute which permits the court to appoint a guardian ad litem establishes the qualifications as well.