Case law

Orozco

District Court, W.D. Washington · Jun 29, 2026

Plaintiff Has Not Established His Entitlement to a TRO. 7 Plaintiff has not met the requirements for an ex parte TRO nor established that he is likely 8 to succeed on the merits of his claims. … See 8 U.S.C. § 1611(a) (“Notwithstanding any other provision of law …, an alien 14 who is not a qualified alien … is not eligible for any Federal public benefit[.]”); id. § 1641(c) 15 (defining a “qualified alien”).

State v. Mason

110 P.3d 245 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Apr 18, 2005

statement fell within a firmly rooted hearsay exception. [4] The excited utterance exception is a firmly rooted hearsay exception, [5] and thus out-of-court *248 statements made by unavailable witnesses were admissible if they qualified … The court clearly limited the admissibility of this testimony, and in this context, Santoso's statement was not introduced to implicate Mason. Crawford is inapplicable. 5.

Moussouris v. Microsoft Corp.

311 F. Supp. 3d 1223 · District Court, W.D. Washington · Apr 25, 2018

Farber's conclusions and to establish that no significant gender-based disparity exists in either pay or promotion. ( See id. at 21, 23-28.) Microsoft also relies on Ms. … Rule 702 requires that the expert be qualified and that the " '[e]xpert testimony ... be both relevant and reliable.' " Estate of Barabin v.

Travelers Cas. & Sur. Co. v. Wash. Trust Bank

Washington Supreme Court · Nov 3, 2016

Instead, the statute essentially provides four alternatives under which a signature may qualify as an indorsement. … The record in this case does not establish the Bank exercised "clearly unreasonable conduct" and therefore failed to exercise reasonable care as a matter oflaw.

United States v. Sutton

165 F. 253 · District Court, E.D. Washington · Oct 23, 1908

Briefly, it is this: The title to allotted lands during the period for which they are held in trust being in the United States, it may control those lands even to the extent of establishing police regulations over them. … Once invested with that dignity, in the absence of treaty stipulations, they are entitled to all the rights, privileges, and immunities of other citizens, and the courts may not discriminate against them.

Johnson v. Western Union Corporation Larbo

District Court, W.D. Washington · Jan 13, 2020

These defendants would have to guess what acts 19 they are supposed to have committed and how those acts relate to, much less establish, 20 one or more of the claims listed in the complaint. 21 … Plaintiff is hereby ORDERED to file on or before February 13, 2020, an 10 amended complaint which clearly and concisely identifies the acts of which each named 11 defendant is accused and how those acts violated plaintiff

State Ex Rel. Wittler v. Yelle

65 Wash. 2d 660 · Washington Supreme Court · Feb 16, 1965

Section 16 declares: “Any member who qualifies for a retirement allowance which is effective on or after the effective date of this 1963 amendatory act shall receive a retirement allowance consisting of: (1) An annuity which … That so clearly was this the intention of the constitution’s authors, say appellants, no single case in the long history of this court has arisen where Article 8 has been held applicable to debts other than those created

Doe v. Corporation of the President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints

141 Wash. App. 407 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Sep 17, 2007

A grant of immunity from liability clearly implies that civil *423 liability can exist in the first place. Accordingly, we conclude that a private cause of action is implied under the mandated reporting statute. B. … Although K.S. was old enough to clearly testify, on balance the probative value of V.C.’s testimony outweighed the prejudicial effect.”

Daniel Bray v. Pierce County

Court of Appeals of Washington · Jan 5, 2021

To qualify as a public policy for purposes of the wrongful discharge tort, a policy must be “truly public” and sufficiently clear. Sedlacek, 145 Wn.2d at 389. … Our review of the statutory authority, as well as prior judicial decisions clearly recognize a clear mandate of public policy to protect victims of domestic violence abuse.

State v. Williams

102 Wash. 2d 733 · Washington Supreme Court · Oct 18, 1984

While continued detention was clearly a great intrusion, society's interest in efficient crime detection and prevention of injury to innocent victims warranted this detention. … Transporting stolen goods from a burglary site must surely qualify as "used in the commission of a felony." See State v. Glasper, 84 Wn.2d 17, 22 , 523 P.2d 937 (1974).

Teagle v. Fischer & Porter Co.

89 Wash. 2d 149 · Washington Supreme Court · Oct 20, 1977

The evidence also established that only 5 to 10 percent of appellant's customers who purchased flowrators used them to measure liquids above 50 p.s.i. … The facts also established that respondent's employer used O-rings made of a material called Viton in the flowrator which exploded.

Pacific Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. Whitcomb

12 F.2d 279 · District Court, W.D. Washington · Apr 22, 1926

In so doing he was clearly right. … The finding of the special master that this expenditure was judicious and proper is clearly right.

State v. Bottrell

14 P.3d 164 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Dec 15, 2000

A: Well, she was clearly in a position where she perceived herself again in an abusive position where her life was being threatened. … This standard is consistent with established case law.

Xiao Ping Chen v. City of Seattle

223 P.3d 1230 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Dec 28, 2009

A trier of fact may conclude that a municipality breached its duty of care based on the totality of the circumstances established by the evidence. … As a human factors analyst, [Alexander is] qualified to analyze and give opinions about the interaction between roadway characteristics and the cues it conveys to the roadway users, including drivers and pedestrians." [2]

Barron v. Safeway Stores, Inc.

704 F. Supp. 1555 · District Court, E.D. Washington · Dec 27, 1988

While plaintiff’s right to reasonable accommodation is clearly a state-created right, what constitutes reasonableness is not so explicitly addressed by the Washington legislature. … Safeway asserts that he was not qualified to return to his former job.

Lawrence v. Times Printing Co.

22 Wash. 482 · Washington Supreme Court · May 17, 1900

It appears here clearly, however, that the peculiar value of the contract in controversy between the plaintiff and The Times Printing Company is based upon the allegation that the right to receive the news reports is exclusively … The term, in a legal sense, contains the element of a grant or immunity, privilege, or exemption by public or quasi-pub] ic authority. It may sometimes be used in a popular sense as a privilege.

State v. Bottrell

103 Wash. App. 706 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Dec 15, 2000

A: Well, she was clearly in a position where she perceived herself again in an abusive position where her life was being threatened. … This standard is consistent with established case law. See Edmon, 28 Wn. App. at 102 (expert must examine and diagnose defendant personally and testify “to an opinion with reasonable medical certainty”); State v.

In Re Recall of West

121 P.3d 1190 · Washington Supreme Court · Oct 26, 2005

This is clearly "wrongful conduct that affects ... the performance of official duty [or] the performance of a duty in an improper manner." … The article II provision was included through the Seventh Amendment, which established these rights of initiative and referendum.

Public Utility District No. 1 v. State

182 Wash. 2d 519 · Washington Supreme Court · Jan 29, 2015

Because the fish hatchery was clearly a present public use, we then engaged in a prior public use analysis. Id. at 453 . … State, 93 Idaho 795 , 473 P.2d 937 (1970) (relating to sovereign immunity). A necessary component of growth is the power to condemn school lands.

Cowlitz County v. Martin

165 P.3d 51 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Aug 14, 2007

Clearly, the Legislature did not intend to grant any eminent domain authority by passage of the Salmon Recovery Act. … In doing so, our Legislature clearly elected not to grant eminent domain power to protect this public interest.