Case law

Black v. National Merit Insurance

154 Wash. App. 674 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Mar 1, 2010

When interpreting a contract our primary goal is to discern the intent of the parties, and such intent must be discovered from viewing the contract as a whole.” 19 “In the absence of anything in the context of a contract clearly … Design, Inc., Profit Sharing Plan, 764 F.2d 827, 833 (11th Cir. 1985) (“It is an established principal that ‘[t]he word “or” is frequently construed to mean “and,” and vice versa, in order to carry out the evident intent

Lester v. Town of Winthrop

87 Wash. App. 17 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jul 10, 1997

That did not happen here. *25 The delay involved here is simply not sufficient to establish a substantive due process claim. … The trial court properly concluded that the Lesters did not qualify for the special relationship exception to the public duty doctrine. Negligent Hiring.

St. Martin's College v. Department of Revenue

68 Wash. App. 12 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Dec 17, 1992

Martin's had the burden of proving at the Board level that it qualified for a property tax exemption. … Clearly, our state and federal constitutions preclude the State from promoting religious education.

Grenning v. Key

District Court, E.D. Washington · Sep 26, 2023

Qualified Immunity 18 Plaintiff contends Defendants were not entitled to qualified immunity. ECF 19 No. 37 at 37. … Thus, even if 7 Defendants had violated Plaintiff’s rights, they would be entitled to qualified 8 immunity. 9 CONCLUSION

Card v. Oaks

District Court, W.D. Washington · May 13, 2025

No. 1-1 at 5–6.)1 The 8 Court identified that Plaintiff’s claims were likely barred by judicial immunity 9 and were otherwise not clearly stated, and ordered him to file an amended 10 … A 19 Magistrate Judge found that Plaintiff qualified for IFP status but that his 20 complaint failed to state a claim. (Dkt. No. 7.)

Card v. Christel

District Court, W.D. Washington · May 13, 2025

No. 1-1 at 5–6.)1 The 8 Court identified that Plaintiff’s claims were likely barred by judicial immunity 9 and were otherwise not clearly stated, and ordered him to file an amended 10 … A 19 Magistrate Judge found that Plaintiff qualified for IFP status but that his 20 complaint failed to state a claim. (Dkt. No. 7.)

Wash. State Hous. Fin. Comm'n v. Nat'l Homebuyers Fund, Inc.

193 Wash. 2d 704 · Washington Supreme Court · Jul 25, 2019

One of these programs assists low-income and first-time home buyers qualify for a mortgage by lending them funds for the *708 required down payment. … Thus, the interest against unauthorized competition was clearly within the zone of interests "regulated or protected" by the statutes.

City Of Vancouver, V State Of Wa Public Employment Relations Comms

Court of Appeals of Washington · Mar 25, 2014

Applying these principles to the case before us, the record clearly demonstrates that Cook relied upon the tainted recommendation of Sutter when making his decision. … The comment at issue came in the context of Schoene' s summary of why Martin' s skills made him the most qualified for a position in the unit.

R W v. Columbia Basin College

District Court, E.D. Washington · Nov 19, 2021

Reagan and Mr. 16 Thornton appealed the portion of the Court’s order denying them qualified 17 immunity. … “was not clearly 3 established.”

State ex rel. Fairbanks v. Superior Court

17 Wash. 12 · Washington Supreme Court · Apr 12, 1897

At the trial plaintiff’s complaint was amended so as to state clearly that plaintiff was in possession under color *15 of right of the office, and the prayer of the complaint was that plaintiff be protected in such possession … The plaintiff was in the council with this certificate, and was thus prima facie a member of the council, having taken the oath of office and duly qualified to exercise its duties. People v.

Giffin v. King County

50 Wash. 327 · Washington Supreme Court · Sep 15, 1908

They must cause to be opened and worked such roads as are necessary for public convenience, which have been laid out and established according to law; levy such taxes for road and bridge purposes as are by law provided for … Furthermore, the state’s contention would be clearly expressed by the remainder of the sentence had the qualifying phrase *331 been omitted.

Card v. Subramanian

District Court, W.D. Washington · May 13, 2025

No. 1-1 at 5–6.)1 The 8 Court identified that Plaintiff’s claims were likely barred by judicial immunity 9 and were otherwise not clearly stated, and ordered him to file an amended 10 … A 19 Magistrate Judge found that Plaintiff qualified for IFP status but that his 20 complaint failed to state a claim. (Dkt. No. 7.)

Card v. Fricke

District Court, W.D. Washington · May 13, 2025

No. 1-1 at 5–6.)1 The 8 Court identified that Plaintiff’s claims were likely barred by judicial immunity 9 and were otherwise not clearly stated, and ordered him to file an amended 10 … A 19 Magistrate Judge found that Plaintiff qualified for IFP status but that his 20 complaint failed to state a claim. (Dkt. No. 7.)

Card v. Pierce County Sheriff's Department

District Court, W.D. Washington · May 13, 2025

No. 1-1 at 5–6.)1 The 8 Court identified that Plaintiff’s claims were likely barred by judicial immunity 9 and were otherwise not clearly stated, and ordered him to file an amended 10 … A 19 Magistrate Judge found that Plaintiff qualified for IFP status but that his 20 complaint failed to state a claim. (Dkt. No. 7.)

Graham v. Notti

196 P.3d 1070 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Dec 2, 2008

And Jolee Wilke is clearly not a "City resident." CP at 41, 124. … governing disposition of lost property in the *1074 hands of a governmental entity, a closely analogous context to the animal shelter's possession of Harlee, provides: If the property is not returned to a person validly establishing

Haselton v. Lapierre

District Court, W.D. Washington · Oct 20, 2023

immunity grounds. … “If the answer to either question is ‘no,’ then the [officers] are entitled to 17 qualified immunity.” Reichle v.

Fray v. Spokane County

85 Wash. App. 150 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Feb 20, 1997

Regardless, the County contends the suit is barred by the employer immunity granted by the Industrial Insurance Act (RCW 51). … The County next argues *158 that the 1992 amendment to LEOFF, which clearly does limit the "right to sue” provision to Plan I members only, effectively eliminated Deputy Fray’s claim against the County.

Rhea Peralta v. Bradley J. Blakely, M.D.

Court of Appeals of Washington · Dec 20, 2022

Generally, this evidence is presented by a qualified expert witness. Id. Simply alleging that Dr. Blakley was grossly negligent is not enough. Dr. … While the statute provides limited immunity with regard to “the decision” to discharge, under a strict construction, it does not provide immunity for all treatment decisions beyond the decision to discharge.

State v. Cauthron

120 Wash. 2d 879 · Washington Supreme Court · Feb 25, 1993

Cotton was amply qualified as an expert; as discussed above, the opinion is based on an accepted scientific theory; and, clearly, this evidence was helpful to the jury. … and (3) Is the sentence clearly excessive? State v. Dunaway, 109 Wn.2d 207, 218 , 743 P.2d 1237 , 749 P.2d 160 (1987). The standard of review for the trial court's factual findings is clearly erroneous. State v.

State v. Saintcalle

178 Wash. 2d 34 · Washington Supreme Court · Aug 1, 2013

. *43 ¶15 As part of the “purposeful discrimination” analysis, the Supreme Court has established a comparative juror analysis. … Id. at 221-22 . ¶19 Swain did little to curb racial discrimination, establishing a “crippling burden of proof” and leaving peremp *44 tory challenges “largely immune from constitutional scrutiny.”