Case law

State v. Michielli

132 Wash. 2d 229 · Washington Supreme Court · May 29, 1997

The Supreme Court of Florida determined that the defendant’s forging checks did not qualify as trafficking in stolen property. … In contrast to the facts in Camp, Michielli’s selling three stolen items to a pawnshop qualifies as trafficking.

State v. Ross

71 Wash. App. 556 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Oct 28, 1994

excessive or clearly too lenient. … The State concedes that the finding is not supported by the record because there was no testimony from a qualified mental health professional as mandated by Pryor, 115 Wn.2d at 454 .

Bogomolov v. LAKE VILLAS CONDOMINIUM ASS'N

127 P.3d 762 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jan 30, 2006

. ¶ 17 The deed clearly states that second-class shorelands were originally conveyed by the State to the original owners of the land in 1917. … Thus, the Declaration does not provide that only the existing numbered boat slips are limited common areas, but rather explains why the existing boat slips qualify as limited common areas.

Bossart v. King County

District Court, W.D. Washington · Sep 10, 2025

. § 1983 (“Section 1983”) alleging constitutional violations, which 11 clearly invoke the Court’s jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1331. … Plaintiffs’ Fifth 18 Amendment claim is that King County lacks authority to regulate their land use; 19 Plaintiffs assert that they have the “absolute right to possess, use, and enjoy the 20 land as [they] see fit, immune

National Merit Insurance v. Yost

101 Wash. App. 236 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jun 9, 2000

Because Yost qualified as an insured under that policy, National General paid her the $100,000 policy limit. … Rather, the plain language clearly indicates the opposite: there is no supplemental insurance over and above the highest amount available under all applicable policies.

Chang

District Court, W.D. Washington · Jan 26, 2026

Because the amended complaint does not clearly 16 articulate what ADA or Rehabilitation Act claims are asserted against the State or 17 what conduct allegedly violated those statutes, the Court cannot evaluate whether … To the extent that Chang asserts ADA or Rehabilitation Act claims against 4 the individual state defendants, those claims are dismissed with prejudice. 5 The State Defendants also assert qualified immunity, but

Terrace v. Thompson

274 F. 841 · District Court, W.D. Washington · Jul 25, 1921

This clearly appears from the note of Baron Uehida to Mr. … waters of the state, while all aliens of the Caucasian .race are permitted to fish freely in the same waters with Impunity and without restraint, and exempt from all punishments, is to exclude him from enjoying the same immunities

Jackson v. Berkey

District Court, W.D. Washington · May 24, 2021

They additionally argued, in the alternative, that they are entitled to 14 qualified immunity. Id. … All three cases concluded 11 that the plaintiffs failed to establish their allergy to the prison soap or the harm the soap 12 inflicted.

The Cooper Point Ass'n v. Thurston County

31 P.3d 28 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Sep 14, 2001

To find an action "clearly erroneous," the Board must be "left with the firm and definite conviction that a mistake has been committed." Dep't of Ecology v. Pub. Util. Dist. … Thus, the County has not established that the proposed sewer line extension is "necessary."

Guijosa v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.

101 Wash. App. 777 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jun 30, 2000

RCW 9A.16.080 clearly provides that a storeowner may detain a suspected shoplifter and wait for the police to arrive, without facing criminal liability. … Wal-Mart clearly raised the issue, and, as a j.n.o.v. is the correct remedy, we need not address any issue of waiver.

State v. Smith

88 Wash. 2d 127 · Washington Supreme Court · Jan 7, 1977

The prohibition is cast in unquestionably general rather then in explicit and clearly definitive language. … The "exigent" circumstances, however, are not established and were clearly not present.

Boparai

District Court, W.D. Washington · Oct 14, 2025

subject to sua sponte review and dismissal by the Court “at any time” to the 24 extent it is “frivolous, malicious, fail[s] to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or 25 seek[s] monetary relief from a defendant immune … This complaint establishes neither. Specifically, it 17 fails to establish a diversity of citizenship. (See generally Dkt. No. 5.)

Clark County v. WESTERN WASH. GROWTH MGT.

254 P.3d 862 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Apr 13, 2011

In addition, like the Growth Board, we defer to the county's planning action unless the action is "clearly erroneous." Brinnon Grp. v. … The Growth Board found that these processes contained no clearly erroneous errors.

Seatac Committee For Good Jobs v. Bf Foods, Llc

Court of Appeals of Washington · Feb 10, 2014

It is found in Title 35A RCW, the title that allows for the establishment of optional municipal code cities and defines how such cities shall be governed and operated. SeaTac is an optional municipal code city. … They clearly do not fear the popular will—if they did, they would not have granted their residents initiative and referendum powers in the first place.

Dellen Wood Products Inc., App. V Wa State Dept. Of Labor And Industries, Resp.

Court of Appeals of Washington · Feb 25, 2014

To qualify as a self - insured employer, an employer must first establish that it has sufficient financial ability to pay workers' compensation benefits and assessments under … A claimant alleging deprivation of due process must first establish a legitimate claim of entitlement. Haberman v. Wash. Pub.

Gregorio v. Green Diamond Resource Company

District Court, W.D. Washington · Apr 24, 2025

If only a portion or portions 8 of the material on a page qualifies for protection, the producing Party also must clearly identify 9 the protected portion(s) (e.g., by making appropriate markings in the margins … The production or disclosure of privileged information shall not constitute or 18 be deemed a waiver or forfeiture in whole or in part of any claim of attorney-client privilege or 19 work product immunity that the disclosing

In Re Smith's Estate

179 Wash. 287 · Washington Supreme Court · Nov 8, 1934

Silvain was appointed, and on May 10, 1932, qualified, as administrator of the estate. … When the state has shown these things, it has established prima facie the escheat of the property." (Italics ours.)

State v. Finkley

6 Wash. App. 278 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jan 3, 1972

That question has been resolved: [T]he right of confrontation may not be invoked to exclude evidence otherwise admissible under well-established legitimate exceptions to the hearsay rule. Kay v. … All seven of those pictured appeared to be of a comparable age, with no distinctive features, except that one of them *283 was not clearly a black, as contrasted with Mr. Finkley and the other five persons pictured.

State Of Washington, App/cross-res. v. Alfred G. Burton, Res./cross-app.

Court of Appeals of Washington · Apr 26, 2016

App. 33, 975 P.2d 1029 (1999), in which Division Three of our court addressed, in the context of a civil suit for false 3 Governor Gregoire vetoed a provision establishing a state registry for qualified patients and … The court in McBride, however, clearly explained that “[t]he self-defense claim did not vitiate probable cause.” Id.

State v. Ha'mim

132 Wash. 2d 834 · Washington Supreme Court · Jul 24, 1997

As to this, the standard of review is clearly erroneous. 2. Do the reasons justify a departure from the standard range? This question is reviewed de novo as a matter of law. 3. … The problem with this argument is that the Legislature did allow exceptional sentences for some first-time offenders and Defendant Ha’mim did not qualify for such leniency. RCW 9.94A.12Q(5).