Case law

Pinecrest Homeowners Ass'n v. Glen A. Cloninger & Associates

151 Wash. 2d 279 · Washington Supreme Court · Apr 15, 2004

Proposals that qualify for the mixed use designation and incorporate mixed uses in a comprehensive site development should demonstrate compliance with the following concepts: 1. … stating that the resolution would “not take effect until the effective date of the ordinance that creates the zoning category referenced herein (new SMC 11.19.2405) and the effective date of the ordinance/resolution that establishes

Barker v. Advanced Silicon Materials, LLC

131 Wash. App. 616 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Feb 14, 2006

Champion was clearly the stronger management candidate. Even if a trier of fact were to find that Ms. … Barker “failed to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that ASIMI’s decision to terminate her employment was moti *629 vated in any respect by retaliation for her lawsuit.”

State v. Otton

185 Wash. 2d 673 · Washington Supreme Court · Jun 9, 2016

In light of these different considerations, we cannot say that the Florida courts’ disagreement with Smith clearly shows that Smith is incorrect. ¶23 Notably, in the seminal case establishing Florida’s bright-line test, the … Otton thus fails to show that Smith is clearly incorrect. 2.

Armstrong v. Armstrong

100 Wash. 270 · Washington Supreme Court · Feb 8, 1918

In the present case, the divorce decree, which established the grantor’s ownership of the property as his separate estate, likewise fixed the wife’s claim for alimony a continuing obligation which the divorced husband was … Both realized that the transfer, if effective, would accomplish the inevitable (and we believe the intended) result—secure the property for the use and enjoyment of the new relationship, with Armstrong immune from the alimony

Heuschele v. Phelps

34 Wash. 2d 414 · Washington Supreme Court · Aug 5, 1949

It was admitted, during the argument in this court, that he has filed his bond and qualified as guardian. We do not consider it necessary to include herein a complete digest of the evidence introduced at the trial. … It is clearly evident that the trial judge concluded that the evidence established the truth of the petitioners’ allegation that the appellant’s property was “in need of proper supervision and protection.”

State v. UTILITIES & TRANSP. COMM'N

93 Wash. 2d 398 · Washington Supreme Court · Apr 24, 1980

I FACTUAL BACKGROUND The State has no general immunity from liability in civil cases and is legally liable for its torts. RCW 4.92. … Thus the State clearly has not shown that the Public Service Revolving Fund finances the activity causing liability.

Klineburger v. King County

189 Wash. App. 153 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Aug 3, 2015

The county hearing examiner affirmed the order, concluding that the County did not have the authority to disturb Ecology’s determination that the Klineburgers’ property did not qualify for an exception to state regulations … DPER informed them that they could not build in the floodway unless they could establish that their site qualified as an exception to the floodplain management regulations.

Eidson v. Department of Licensing

108 Wash. App. 712 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Oct 15, 2001

That was clearly stated in the Statement of Charges. The fact that he failed to support the $5,000 adjustment is a fact relating to the issue, not an issue to be litigated. … taken as established, supports the conclusion that Eidson did not exercise reasonable diligence, as discussed below.

Chappel v. Franklin Pierce School District No. 402

71 Wash. 2d 17 · Washington Supreme Court · Apr 6, 1967

Since establishment on the Franklin Pierce school campus, an initiation ceremony for newly elected members, while not compulsory, had become somewhat traditional with the chapter. … We there held that the statutory immunity afforded by RCW 28.58.030 was not repealed by implication. In the instant situation, it is to be noted that in Coates v. Tacoma School Dist.

Falkner v. Foshaug

108 Wash. App. 113 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Aug 27, 2001

Clearly, there is no showing of exoneration that has been made. … In Krahn , the attorney failed to convey a plea offer, and in Gebhardt , an offer of immunity. Several commentators have also criticized the innocence requirement as unnecessary and unfair. See, e.g., Susan M.

Conner v. Hodgdon

120 Wash. 426 · Washington Supreme Court · Jun 16, 1922

Clapp, 42 Wash. 642 , 85 Pac. 342 , finally resulting in the establishment of Conner’s title to the.property. … Hodgdon duly qualified as executor of his estate and was substituted as intervener.

Boutillier v. LIBBY, McNEILL & LIBBY

42 Wash. App. 699 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jan 28, 1986

We disagree. *710 [3] The 70-formula benefits clearly fall within ERISA. … and the reasons for termination were clearly outside their own control.

Sundberg v. Shelton School District No 309

District Court, W.D. Washington · Apr 29, 2024

immunity arguments, qualified immunity is “an 22 affirmative defense that the government has the burden of pleading and proving.” … Because Defendant provided no response to 23 Plaintiff’s complaint, let alone a pleading of qualified immunity, the Court does not consider it

Gerberding v. Munro

134 Wash. 2d 188 · Washington Supreme Court · Jan 8, 1998

VII, § 2: “Every citizen of the United States who is a legal resident of the state and is a qualified elector therein, shall be qualified to hold any public office in the state except as otherwise provided in this Constitution … Term limits clearly promote this end.

Vehicle/Vessel, L.L.C. v. Whitman County

122 Wash. App. 770 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Aug 3, 2004

who is qualified and was chosen through the open competitive process. … Clearly Mr. Antoni knew the procedures for appointment of a successor subagent. His letter of intent refers to the DOL’s guidelines and contract assignment *771 terms. Mr.

Barker v. Advanced Silicon Materials, LLC

128 P.3d 633 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Feb 14, 2006

Champion was clearly the stronger management candidate. Even if a trier of fact were to find that Ms. … Barker "failed to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that ASIMI's decision to terminate her employment was motivated in any respect by retaliation for her lawsuit."

Falkner v. Foshaug

29 P.3d 771 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Aug 27, 2001

Clearly, there is no showing of exoneration that has been made. … In Krahn , the attorney failed to convey a plea offer, and in Gebhardt , an offer of immunity. Several commentators have also criticized the innocence requirement as unnecessary and unfair. See, e.g., Susan M.

Sorio

District Court, W.D. Washington · Sep 2, 2026

However, Respondents assert that the 13 United States is immune from an award of attorney fees in an immigration habeas action. … The United States Is Not Immune from Attorney Fees 10 Respondents argue that the United States is immune from attorney fees in this action. 11 Dkt. No. 41 at 3–7.

Pinecrest Homeowners Ass'n v. GLEN A. CLONINGER & ASS'N

87 P.3d 1176 · Washington Supreme Court · Apr 15, 2004

Proposals that qualify for the mixed use designation and incorporate mixed uses in a comprehensive site development should demonstrate compliance with the following concepts: 1. … stating that the resolution would "not take effect until the effective date of the ordinance that creates the zoning category referenced herein (new SMC 11.19.2405) and the effective date of the ordinance/resolution that establishes

Rice v. City of Roy

District Court, W.D. Washington · Jul 7, 2021

QUALIFIED IMMUNITY – GENERALLY 10 Defendants in a Section 1983 action are entitled to qualified immunity from damages for 11 civil liability if their conduct does not violate clearly … the light most 16 favorable to the party asserting the injury; and (2) whether the right was clearly established when 17 viewed in the specific context of the case.