Case law

State v. Peyton

29 Wash. App. 701 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jun 30, 1981

In a 55-page majority opinion that discusses the leading studies on the issue of conviction proneness, Hovey concludes that the petitioner failed to establish that California death-qualified juries were so prosecution prone … As for Mathis, his attorney did present two witnesses tending to establish an alibi defense.

Avnet, Inc. v. Department of Revenue

187 Wash. 2d 44 · Washington Supreme Court · Nov 23, 2016

Ed. 2d 430 (1964) (“ ‘a taxpayer claiming immunity from a tax has the burden of establishing his exemption’ ” (quoting Norton Co. v. Dep’t of Revenue, 340 U.S. 534, 537 , 71 S. Ct. 377 , 95 L. … The general rule, applicable here, is that a taxpayer claiming immunity from a tax has the burden of establishing [its] exemption.” Norton, 340 U.S. at 537 .

Roeder Co. v. K & E Moving & Storage Co.

4 P.3d 839 · Court of Appeals of Washington · May 30, 2000

The record establishes that railroads paid significant amounts for both easements and fee simple purchases. [17] Therefore, the negligible consideration alone does not negate the conclusion that, when read in light of Brown … Courts must "conduct a deed-by-deed analysis to ascertain whether the parties clearly and expressly limited or qualified the interest granted, considering the express language, the form of the instrument, and the surrounding

City of Seattle v. Rogers

6 Wash. 2d 31 · Washington Supreme Court · Oct 24, 1940

Clearly, the city had the right to enact such legislation, and the law is not unconstitutional as unreasonable or in excess of the police power of the city. … I, § 12, of the constitution of this state, which reads as follows: “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

State v. Eckblad

152 Wash. 2d 515 · Washington Supreme Court · Oct 14, 2004

Washington’s seat belt law is hardly a model of clarity; however, we conclude that the statute is not facially void, and Trevor Eckblad does not establish it is void as applied to the facts of his case. … We caution that we do not hold that the statute is immune from a future due process challenge. It may be *522 unconstitutionally vague as applied to a different case. Cf. Maxwell, 74 Wn.

State v. Pratt

196 Wash. 2d 849 · Washington Supreme Court · Jan 28, 2021

So there clearly is not an established relationship. 2 State v. Pratt, No. 98066-7 3 VRP (Jan. 5, 2018) at 349. … and asking her name—were not sufficient to qualify as an established relationship or connection.

Nelson v. White (In re White)

47 B.R. 410 · District Court, W.D. Washington · Feb 8, 1985

Prior to bankruptcy, White was clearly in control of both White Metal and the profit-sharing plan. … Clearly, the ERISA plan purports to restrict alienation of beneficial interests.

Neal v. City of Bainbridge Island

District Court, W.D. Washington · Apr 19, 2023

other discretionary decisions, the City’s conduct meets the four-part test set forth in Evangelical 17 to qualify for discretionary immunity. … That motion is noted for April 21, 2023. 24 1 When determining whether a government act qualifies for discretionary immunity under 2

State v. Aaron

57 Wash. App. 277 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Mar 19, 1990

Murphy 2 and a number of other *281 Washington cases 3 clearly establish the impropriety of admitting such hearsay evidence. … ER 702 provides: If scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue, a witness qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience

State v. Catling

193 Wash. 2d 252 · Washington Supreme Court · Apr 18, 2019

Accordingly, on remand, the trial court is directed to revise the judgment and sentence to eliminate such interest on any qualifying remaining LFOs. … Catling qualified for disability income more than 10 years ago and, given his medical condition, will likely remain on it for the rest of his life.

PHOENIX DEVELOPMENT, INC. v. City of Woodinville

171 Wash. 2d 820 · Washington Supreme Court · Jun 16, 2011

The superior court dismissed the petition, holding that Phoenix failed to establish compliance with any of the six standards set out in RCW 36.70C.130(1). … The City’s conclusion is not a clearly erroneous application of the law ¶31 A finding is clearly erroneous under RCW 36.70C-.130(l)(d) when, although there is evidence to support it, the reviewing court on the entire evidence

Faasch v. Karney

145 Wash. 390 · Washington Supreme Court · Oct 26, 1927

The court proceeded in a very careful manner to select two competent, qualified, disinterested physicians for that purpose. … In our opinion, it clearly preponderates in favor of the findings, which in turn support the judgment. In treating Mrs. Faasch, the appellant performed two surgical operations that were similar.

McLean v. Roller

33 Wash. 166 · Washington Supreme Court · Oct 8, 1903

The facts above stated were found by the trial court, and are accepted by both parties as established facts in the cause. … Code, § 248) provides that ‘every duly qualified notary public is authorized in any county *169 in this state ... to take depositions and affidavits and administer all oaths required by law to be administered;’ and, in our

Lough v. Washington State Department of Social and Health Services

District Court, W.D. Washington · Jun 10, 2021

Motion to Stay (Dkt. 40) 12 In their Response to the Motion to Compel, Defendants move to stay discovery until the 13 issue of qualified immunity is decided. Dkt. 40. … Defendants raised qualified immunity in their 14 Answer and state that they are currently drafting a 12(c) motion that will address the issue of 15 qualified immunity.

King Ex Rel. King v. Snohomish County

21 P.3d 1151 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Apr 25, 2001

King, stating that he did not believe the County was liable for her son's injury because of immunity statutorily afforded the County. … The Court held, however, that the plaintiffs could not establish the third factor requiring justifiable reliance.

Diamond "B" Constructors, Inc. v. Granite Falls School District

117 Wash. App. 157 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Apr 14, 2003

By stating only a “preference,” not a requirement, Ennes’ message clearly did not rule out Sound Energy. VII. … There are other qualified installers. VIII. The District’s Arguments: The District makes two additional arguments.

Micahn T. Carter v. Mary E. Jones

Court of Appeals of Washington · Dec 30, 2025

My duties were never clearly explained to me, so I stepped in wherever I could. … Issue 5: What measure of fault must a defamation plaintiff establish to defeat a qualified privilege? Answer 5: Knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard of the truth.

State Of Washington v. Damien Andrew Daniels

437 P.3d 723 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Mar 25, 2019

However, under the Drug Court Eligibility Criteria in the manual for the King County Adult Diversion Court (the Manual), felony assault and attempt to elude do not qualify as crimes eligible for DDC. … This provision clearly serves to mitigate against the risk of misinterpreting the statute to require prosecutor consent for treatment outside the therapeutic court context.

In Re Personal Restraint of Hutchinson

53 P.3d 17 · Washington Supreme Court · Aug 29, 2002

Because a state immunity law actually deprived the witnesses of that privilege, the witnesses were subsequently prosecuted for contempt. … Hutchinson has failed to carry his burden of establishing that the "constitutional error[s] worked to his `actual and substantial prejudice.'" In re Pers. Restraint of St.

State v. Rose

7 Wash. App. 176 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jun 26, 1972

The record clearly establishes that the defendant, Stanley D. Rose, and companion, Donald F. … Ses., which became effective August 9, 1971. 4 The record clearly establishes that the two officers approached Mr. Rose from two different directions. 5 Some municipal ordinances do define such a crime.