Case law

State Of Washington, V. Cory Taylor Pratt

Court of Appeals of Washington · Jun 28, 2022

So there clearly is not an established relationship. Pratt, 196 Wn.2d at 851 (alterations in original) (citations omitted). … The legislature clearly intended the community custody served on SSOSA to not be credited for time served against a sentence if the SSOSA is revoked for any purpose.

Grondal v. United States

682 F. Supp. 2d 1203 · District Court, E.D. Washington · Jan 12, 2010

Prior to his death, Evans established “Wapato Heritage LLC” to manage his non-trust assets. … Plaintiffs’ admit that the MA-8 landowners qualified as “interested parties” to the Evans’ estate-yet they did not receive notice.

Lemire v. Department of Ecology

178 Wash. 2d 227 · Washington Supreme Court · Aug 15, 2013

Atkins may be able to qualify as such, but no court made that “expert” determination. ER 702. … Just as Atkins would likely qualify as an expert for purposes of a trial due to his training and experience, Lemire also would likely qualify as an expert in farming, ranching, and cattle behavior for similar reasons.

Karanjah v. Department of Social & Health Services

199 Wash. App. 903 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jul 25, 2017

A qualified 19 48666-1-II party shall be considered to have prevailed if the qualified party obtained relief on a significant issue that achieves some benefit … that the qualified party sought.

Post v. Maryland Casualty Co.

2 Wash. 2d 21 · Washington Supreme Court · Dec 19, 1939

Morrison owned all the stock except that held by directors as qualifying shares. Morrison Investment Company was organized February 16, 1933. … All stock in that company, except qualifying shares held by directors, stood in the name of Morrison & Company, Inc.

State v. Kronich

161 P.3d 982 · Washington Supreme Court · Jul 12, 2007

In other words, assuming there was an error, it clearly had "practical and identifiable consequences in the trial of the case." State v. Stein, 144 Wash.2d 236, 240 , 27 P.3d 184 (2001). … CONCLUSION ¶ 22 Kronich's claim that the trial court violated his rights under the Confrontation Clause by admitting a DOL certification qualifies as a claim of manifest error affecting a constitutional right.

Draper MacHine Works, Inc. v. Department of Natural Resources

117 Wash. 2d 306 · Washington Supreme Court · Sep 5, 1991

They were dealing solely with .010, which clearly does not allow any private use of public waterways other than for navigation. … To qualify under the statutes as tidelands, the property must underlie tidally influenced water. RCW 79.90.030, .035.

Metropolitan Park District v. State

85 Wash. 2d 821 · Washington Supreme Court · Sep 18, 1975

RCW 79.08.080 establishes legal authorization for the issuances of use deeds. … Arguably, the committee might have erred in determining that the District’s intended use qualified for a use deed.

State v. Hinton

12 Wash. App. 267 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Dec 16, 1974

Jarvis was not qualified to answer the hypothetical question without first showing he had knowledge of defendant based on his personal examination. We do not agree. … Jarvis to testify “upon a ground, or to an extent, clearly untenable or manifestly unreasonable.” Friedlander v. Friedlander, 80 Wn.2d 293, 298 , 494 P.2d 208 (1972). See generally R.

State v. Olson

74 Wash. App. 126 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Apr 18, 1994

The notice of appeal clearly states what is intended, the brief was sufficient for Olson to respond, and he has responded. … The most commonsense interpretation of this experience is that the affidavit contained sufficient information for the magistrate to infer that Detective Brossard was qualified to identify both growing and burning marijuana

State v. Flowers

30 Wash. App. 718 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Feb 3, 1982

Acting knowingly or with knowledge also is established if a person acts intentionally. Although this instruction was disapproved in State v. … Also, because of the prosecutor's request for the death penalty, he argues that he was prejudiced by the process used to qualify the jury for a death penalty case.

Weaver v. Evans

80 Wash. 2d 461 · Washington Supreme Court · Apr 6, 1972

This system embraced the annuity concept as well as a pension benefit upon qualified retirement. … Rather, the majority, in the name of "vested right," establishes a prior claim to state funds, immune from the exercise by the legislature and the executive of their constitutional and statutory duties.

South Hollywood Hills Citizens Ass'n v. King County

101 Wash. 2d 68 · Washington Supreme Court · Feb 2, 1984

II The doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies is well established in Washington. … The record clearly indicates these procedures were followed.

Brewer v. Copeland

86 Wash. 2d 58 · Washington Supreme Court · Nov 13, 1975

Freehe, supra (interspousal immunity); Borst v. Borst, 41 Wn.2d 642 , 251 P.2d 149 (1952) (parental immunity). [4] We fail to find these arguments persuasive. … For instance, in our cases abolishing interspousal tort immunity, Freehe v. Freehe, 81 Wn.2d 183 , 500 P.2d 771 (1972), and parental immunity, Borst v.

McCurry v. Chevy Chase Bank, FSB

233 P.3d 861 · Washington Supreme Court · Jun 24, 2010

Under CR 12(b)(6) a plaintiff states a claim upon which relief can be granted if it is possible that facts could be established to support the allegations in the complaint. See Halvorson *863 v. … Further, the federal regulation clearly indicates that even laws of general applicability have the potential to have a more than incidental impact on lending practices.

Klemens v. Air Line Pilots Ass'n, International

500 F. Supp. 735 · District Court, W.D. Washington · Oct 31, 1980

. § 402 (o), they do not qualify as “members” under the LMRDA. By its terms, the second proviso applies to “any such action”, which refers back to suits by union members against their unions. … The granting of motions to strike is not generally favored, because it is difficult to establish that a defense is clearly insufficient.

In re the Personal Restraint of Cross

180 Wash. 2d 664 · Washington Supreme Court · Jun 26, 2014

The Supreme Court recruits and maintains a list of attorneys qualified for appointment by virtue of training or experience. Id. … Weyerhaeuser Co., 134 Wn.2d 795, 803 , 953 P.2d 800 (1998) (malingering can be established through expert and nonexpert opinion).

Havens v. C & D PLASTICS, INC.

124 Wash. 2d 158 · Washington Supreme Court · Aug 22, 1994

He believed he had authority to do so and thought the individual was experienced and qualified for the job. … Plaintiff thought he was not qualified and did not hire him for the position.

Murray v. Amrine

28 Wash. App. 650 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Mar 20, 1981

The court also refused to give defendant's proposed instruction requiring the jury to find him guilty of gross negligence to establish liability. … State, 84 Wn.2d 959, 962-64 , 530 P.2d 630 (1975), Hammack and Nogosek are distinguishable in that both dealt with statutory abolition of a prior statutory immunity or defense.

State v. Stephan

35 Wash. App. 889 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Oct 31, 1983

Stephan attempted to present his limited involvement in the activities, the court asked if he was qualifying his statement. Mr. … Applying these rules, we hold the language quoted above refers to RCW 9A.04 through 9A.16, which defines terms, limits actions, establishes culpability and capacity, sets the standard of proof, establishes defenses, etc.