Case law

Vietzke v. Austin Co.

54 F. Supp. 265 · District Court, E.D. Washington · Feb 23, 1944

Clearly, an agent of the Government whose power stems exclusively from a contract occupies no higher position than does a duly appointed and constituted officer of the Government. … Tarlton Contractor, Inc., supra, holds is that when a party claims immunity as a government agent, he is entitled to assert that immunity in a Federal court.

State Of Washington V. American Tobacco Co.

Court of Appeals of Washington · Oct 16, 2023

Because the State adopted the language from the Model Statute as its Qualifying Statute, section VII(c)(1) necessarily extends to the State’s Qualifying Statute. … Though the PMs’ issue statements could have been more clearly phrased, the State cannot justly argue that it was not aware of the PMs’ arguments. This issue is not waived.

Tumelson v. Todhunter

105 Wash. 2d 596 · Washington Supreme Court · Apr 3, 1986

It is ultimately her responsibility to determine whether an applicant qualifies for a driver's license. … Monroe's submission of the certificate is inadmissible, whereas testimony establishing the legal requirements for obtaining a license is admissible.

Stevens County v. Futurewise

192 P.3d 1 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Sep 4, 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.

State Ex Rel. Bentley v. Frenger

158 Wash. 683 · Washington Supreme Court · Oct 2, 1930

These, we think, are all of the facts of this controversy necessary to be here noticed, and are either undisputed or clearly established by the evidence. … These considerations clearly establish the right of Frenger to be adjudged the father of the child.

Alpine Lakes Protection Society v. Department of Natural Resources

102 Wash. App. 1 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jul 12, 1999

Standard of Review Threshold decisions that an EIS is not required generally are reviewed under the “clearly erroneous” standard. King County v. … Under the act, only certain “qualified” parties are eligible for fees but there is no dispute that ALPS is a qualified party.

Seattle Times Co. v. Tielsch

80 Wash. 2d 502 · Washington Supreme Court · Apr 20, 1972

During 1970 an average of about 35,000 entries was received by plaintiff during each of the nine qualifying weeks. … The appellant maintains that chance is not a dominant element in football forecasting contests and that its evidence clearly established this to be the fact.

Lakeside Industries v. Thurston County

119 Wash. App. 886 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jan 13, 2004

Rather the plan, together with the zoning code, specifically allows asphalt production if the project qualifies for a special use permit. III. … The language in Lutheran Day Care is clearly dicta. The Supreme Court did not decide that hearing examiners could be liable for denying a land use permit.

State ex rel. Gunn v. Superior Court

111 Wash. 187 · Washington Supreme Court · May 24, 1920

The reasons given by the courts in establishing what is spoken of as the majority rule have no application whatever to the present case. … The cases supporting that rule are uniformly the same and are clearly illustrated by the cases of Mitchell v. Huron County Circuit Judge, 53 Mich. 541 , 19 N. W. 176 , and Wilson Sewing Machine Co. v.

Lubetich v. Pollock

6 F.2d 237 · District Court, W.D. Washington · Jun 13, 1925

individual having any property rights to be affected, it necessarily results that the Legislature, as the representative of the people of the state, may withhold or grant to individuals the right to hunt and kill game, or qualify … It is, in fact, a property right, and not a mere privilege or immunity of citizenship.”

In Re Welfare of LNB-L.

237 P.3d 944 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Aug 3, 2010

Health Services failed to establish several elements of RCW 13.34.180(1) [3] and ICWA. … One case clearly does not support KL's assertion, stating, "[w]e do not hold that an expert ICWA witness qualified under subpart three of the Guidelines must be fluent in the cultural standards of a particular Indian tribe

Casement v. Squier

46 F. Supp. 296 · District Court, W.D. Washington · Aug 14, 1942

By the constitution a government is ordained and established ‘for the United States of America/ and not for countries outside of their limits. … The Act of Congress establishing such United States Court for China, 22 U.S.C.A. § 191 , provides: “A court is hereby established, to be called the United States Court for China, which shall have exclusive jurisdiction in

State v. Morley

134 Wash. 2d 588 · Washington Supreme Court · Mar 12, 1998

We find Defendants’ courts-martial qualify as convictions under the SRA. … Both Defendants have failed to establish the facial invalidity of their courts-martial.

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. Swarva

86 Wash. 2d 29 · Washington Supreme Court · Oct 30, 1975

This is not a case where, as in Medina , a particular theory is entirely speculative and clearly inappropriate. … the full amount so established.

Bracy v. United Retail Merchants

189 Wash. 162 · Washington Supreme Court · Jan 8, 1937

any public highway between fixed termini or over a regular route, unless such person prior to engaging in such business make a written contract or contracts with all persons for whom such transportation is to be furnished clearly … found due the plaintiff, such wages or earnings from all other sources as he had made subsequent to the alleged breach of the contract; and that, if they found the plaintiff was entitled to recover, but had failed *169 to establish

Saved Magazine v. City of Spokane

District Court, E.D. Washington · Dec 3, 2020

. § 5 1983 against Officer Doe in his individual capacity, Defendants argue that the claim 6 must be dismissed based on qualified immunity. … Qualified immunity is “an entitlement not to stand trial or face the other 4 burdens of litigation.”

State v. Garza

Washington Supreme Court · Oct 20, 2022

Under subsection (5)(c), if a juvenile has not paid full restitution by the end of the diversion period, the court must enter a civil order establishing the amount of restitution still owed to the victim and … “Order and findings” clearly does not mean “adjudication.” There is no need to go further before affirming the decisions below.

Fisher v. State Ex Rel. Dept. of Health

106 P.3d 836 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Feb 15, 2005

Fisher could not establish the intent element. … The plaintiff must establish actual severe emotional distress. Reid, 136 Wash.2d at 202 , 961 P.2d 333 . Ms.

Christie v. State of Washington Department of Corrections

District Court, W.D. Washington · Aug 26, 2024

The Court considered their tenth affirmative defense of qualified immunity in its 2 order on Defendants’ motion for summary judgment. … In Plaintiffs’ reply, they clarify that they are not pursuing new 13 theories, but rather arguing that CCO Miller’s failure to convey information about Anthony’s 14 heightened risk of suicide breached DOC’s established