Case law

Snohomish County Builders Ass'n v. Snohomish Health District

8 Wash. App. 589 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Apr 2, 1973

“the technique established by the respondent’s resolutions were not followed.” … An ordinance to be void for unreasonableness must be clearly and plainly unreasonable. Seattle v. Hurst, 50 Wash. 424 , 97 Pac. 454 .

Gallegos

District Court, W.D. Washington · May 26, 2026

The Supreme Court has set forth a two-part analysis for resolving government 16 officials’ qualified immunity claims. See Saucier v. … “[I]n deciding whether qualified immunity 18 applies, [the court] ask[s] two questions: (1) did the officer violate a constitutional right, and (2) 19 was that right clearly established at the time of the events at issue

State v. Thompson

151 Wash. 2d 793 · Washington Supreme Court · Jun 24, 2004

Thompson’s use of the boathouse was clearly dependent upon the permission of the owners, i.e., his parents. … The items discovered in the boathouse following a lawful consent to search by Thompson’s father together with the items found in open view on the property clearly established probable cause for the search warrant independent

Stewart v. Extra Space Storage

District Court, W.D. Washington · Feb 28, 2025

All facts, witnesses, and documents which The City bases its contention set 10 forth in ¶ 81 of the Answer to Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint stating that the City “is entitled to qualified immunity … “This 1 Rule was intended to prevent the officers or managers of larger organizations from 2 ‘bandying,’ the practice of disclaiming knowledge of facts clearly known to the 3 organization.”

Rickert v. State, Public Disclosure Com'n

168 P.3d 826 · Washington Supreme Court · Oct 4, 2007

But in addition, where these attacks are allowed, this type of harm can also deter qualified persons from seeking political office, resulting in harm to the democratic community. … First, it is the standard established by the Court to satisfy competing constitutional concerns.

Stevens County v. Futurewise

146 Wash. App. 493 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jun 26, 2008

It was only after that meeting that the county added a subsection to SCC 13.10.034(3) that qualified the classification of critical habitat: C. … The county also fails to establish identity in the subject matter.

Arnett v. Seattle General Hospital

65 Wash. 2d 22 · Washington Supreme Court · Oct 1, 1964

The purpose of the law against discrimination is to eliminate racial prejudice and establish equality among all persons seeking the same employment, to the end that the most qualified person will be employed, whether Caucasian … It is elementary that one who asserts dishonesty has the burden of establishing it by a fair preponderance of the evidence. The facts established that the hospital attendant who answered the telephone advised Mrs.

Short v. Demopolis

103 Wash. 2d 52 · Washington Supreme Court · Nov 6, 1984

Federal courts generally have refused to adopt a blanket immunity for the "learned professions". … App. 1979) (advertising of legal services is clearly a "trade" or "commerce" under unfair trade practices and consumer protection law); Matthews v.

Dodge City Saloon, Inc. v. Washington State Liquor Control Board

168 Wash. App. 388 · Court of Appeals of Washington · May 15, 2012

The fulcrum point upon which the [Liquor] Board’s key argument rests is that card itself stated clearly when [C.M.] would turn 18, which also clearly meant that at the time he was not 21 either. … A qualified party shall be considered to *405 have prevailed if the qualified party obtained relief on a significant issue that achieves some benefit that the qualified party sought.

Agency Budget Corp. v. Washington Insurance Guaranty Ass'n

93 Wash. 2d 416 · Washington Supreme Court · May 1, 1980

We recognize that there is an established exception to the presumption of prospective intent. … Plaintiff was injured when the immunity was in effect.

City of Bellevue v. Cashier's Check for $51,000 & $1,130 in U.S. Currency

70 Wash. App. 697 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jul 26, 1993

A Does the Claimant Qualify as an Owner for Purposes of Asserting the Innocent Owner Defense? … Kawa, at 800. 5 Even if, however, the check is treated as real property because it represents the proceeds from real property, RCW 11.04.250 clearly indicates that Williams' ownership interest in the check was limited by

State v. Ragan

22 Wash. App. 591 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Feb 6, 1979

Details are not admissible unless they are qualified under the res gestae (excited utterance) exception to the hearsay rule. State v. King, supra. See also State v. Bloomstrom, 12 Wn. … The reason for admitting it in the case in chief in sex crimes is clearly set forth in, 4 J. Wigmore, Evidence § 1135, at 298-300 (rev. ed. J.

In Re Smith

986 P.2d 131 · Washington Supreme Court · Oct 14, 1999

Nov. 11, 1997), I would hold former RCW 9.94A.150(1) (1996) ambiguous, and I would then apply established principles of statutory construction to determine the meaning of the statute. … Moreover, applying basic rules of law, the holding in Mahrle was clearly applicable to all persons similarly situated (particularly in regards to petitioner Smith, who was located within the jurisdiction of the Court of Appeals

Chemithon Corp. v. Agency

19 Wash. App. 689 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Apr 10, 1978

Other sections of regulation 1 establish the substantive standards based on chemical or physical composition of the emissions. … Clearly Erroneous We first consider whether or not this matter should be reviewed under the "clearly erroneous" test. In Ancheta v.

The Geo. L. Harvey

273 F. 972 · District Court, W.D. Washington · Mar 25, 1921

The work performed and the material furnished, except as to Augustine & Kyer and possibly some portions of other claims, is clearly in the nature of construction, and bore in no sense a relation to trade and commerce. … Ed. —, December 6, 1920, said: “The doctrine is now firmly established that contracts to construct entirely new ships are nonmaritime, because not nearly enough related to any rights and duties pertaining to commerce and

Shasky v. Burden

78 Wash. 2d 193 · Washington Supreme Court · Jun 11, 1970

Shasky, plaintiff, testified that she was carrying a sandwich and a container of coffee to a friend of hers in a business establishment on the east side of Broadway a few doors north of the 19th Street intersection. … It correctly informed the jury as to the respective rights, duties and immunities of vehicle operators and pedestrians when traversing through and along pedestrian crosswalks at signal-controlled intersections.

Beeler v. Standard Investment Co.

107 Wash. 442 · Washington Supreme Court · Jun 30, 1919

But this clearly could not he regarded as mismanagement or incompetencv on the part of the manager. It was contended by the respondents that the trustees were dominated by the president of the corporation. … Some of the witnesses testified that it would cost about $30 per acre, and the evidence on the part of the appellants shows that an effort had been made to establish a drainage district in that section of the country so as

Protect The Peninsula's Future v. Haaland

District Court, W.D. Washington · Nov 12, 2024

Dkt. 36. 9 Plaintiffs contend that Jamestown does not qualify for intervention as a matter of 10 right. … Regarding the second factor, Jamestown clearly has an 10 interest relating to the property that is the subject of the action.

State v. Teshome

94 P.3d 1004 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jul 26, 2004

Instead, the court made the assumption that because Teclemaria had interpreted in the past, he must be qualified. But the statute does not merely require a qualified interpreter. … Although the court explained that the manager's apology was premature, because the court had not yet concluded that the interpreting had been poorly done, the manager clearly thought Teclemaria's work with Teshome had been

State v. Teshome

122 Wash. App. 705 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jul 26, 2004

Instead, the court made the assumption that because Teclemaria had interpreted in the past, he must be qualified. But the statute does not merely require a qualified interpreter. … Although the court explained that the *706 manager’s apology was premature because the court had not yet concluded that the interpreting had been poorly done, the manager clearly thought Teclemaria’s work with Teshome had