Case law

CKP, Inc. v. GRS Construction Co.

63 Wash. App. 601 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Dec 23, 1991

Such work qualified as extra work arising outside and independent of the contract price, which was also upheld. Manke, 27 Wn. … First, some extras (described in finding of fact 13) were the subject of executed contract modifications 1 and 3 through 7, which clearly defined price or the manner in which price would be computed.

Jacobs v. Brock

66 Wash. 2d 878 · Washington Supreme Court · Sep 23, 1965

The guidelines for making this determination are well established in this state: [3, 4] In Johnson v. … She was therefore qualified to testify as an expert witness in regard to such services. In view of the remand, our consideration of the remaining issues raised is unnecessary.

Laube

District Court, W.D. Washington · Dec 1, 2025

A statute of limitations “must be strictly construed” because 3 it “is a condition on the waiver of sovereign immunity[.]” Bowen v. City of New York, 476 U.S. 4 467, 479 (1986). … “Equitable tolling is typically 7 denied in cases where a litigant’s own mistake clearly contributed to his predicament.” Harris v. 8 Carter, 515 F.3d 1051, 1055 (9th Cir. 2008).

Denny v. Sayward

10 Wash. 422 · Washington Supreme Court · Dec 28, 1894

Authorities have been cited to establish the doctrine that one not served with process in an action is not bound by a judgment rendered therein ; but they are none of them in point, under the circumstances of this case. … Harrington as individuals, or as members of the partnership of Crawford & Harrington ; but it does not so clearly appear that the defendant was injured by any questions growing out of this variance, if variance it was, as

Everest Indemnity Insurance v. QBE Insurance

980 F. Supp. 2d 1273 · District Court, W.D. Washington · Oct 31, 2013

It requested that QBE/CAU agree to defend and indemnify Derus as a qualified insured under QBE/CAU’s insurance policies. Id. at ¶ 15. QBE/CAU denied Derus’ tender for defense by letter on August 14, 2009. Id. at ¶ 16. … Motion for Partial Summary Judgment Summary judgment is proper if the moving party establishes that there are no genuine issues of material fact and it is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.

Lewis v. Baird

District Court, W.D. Washington · Oct 8, 2019

Id. at 9 349. 10 To establish he suffered an actual injury, plaintiff must show “actual prejudice with 11 respect to contemplated or existing … Bonzelet, 963 13 F.2d 1258, 1262 (9th Cir. 1992), any amended complaint must clearly identify the defendant(s), 14 the constitutional or federal statutory claim(s) asserted, the specific facts that plaintiff believes

State Of Washington, V Albert K. Smith

Court of Appeals of Washington · Jan 23, 2019

“When we think about quantities that do not qualify as ‘some,’ we think of ‘all’ and ‘none.’ By contrast, ‘one’ plainly qualifies as ‘some.’” Phillips, slip op. at 12. … Applied here, two convictions plainly qualify as multiple offenses, and one offense would go unpunished.

Goehle v. Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research

1 P.3d 579 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Mar 20, 2000

The appellate court will only review a claimed error which is included in an assignment of error or clearly disclosed in the associated issue pertaining thereto. … To limit the damage award, the employer must first establish that the misconduct was of such severity that the employee would have been terminated on the *586 basis of the misconduct alone if the employer had known of it.

Alaska v. Baker

64 Wash. 2d 207 · Washington Supreme Court · Apr 9, 1964

The following sections are clearly and plainly regulatory enactments, and being severable, should be severed: §§ 43.10.160; 43.10.170; 43.10.200; 43.70.020(d); 43.70.070(a) (b); and 43.70.100. … In addition, RCW 4.16.100, supra, established a 2-year limitation against such actions brought in the courts of this state.

Resident Action Council v. Seattle Hous. Auth.

Washington Supreme Court · May 9, 2013

Harborview Med Ctr., 94 Wn.2d 559, 567-68, 618 P.2d 76 (1980) (burden shifts to the party seeking disclosure to establish exemption is clearly unnecessary). … SHA's total failure to establish reasonable and effective policies and procedures to govern disclosure of public records was in violation of the PRA, see RCW 42.56.040, .070, clearly contributed to SHA's failure to adequately

St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance v. Hebert Construction, Inc.

450 F. Supp. 2d 1214 · District Court, W.D. Washington · Sep 7, 2006

The MV Defendants appear to concede that Jacks qualified as MVLLC’s “broker” under the definition in RCW 48.17.020. … In addition to arguing that attorneys’ fees do not qualify as “costs taxed,” St.

In Re the Proceedings for the Discipline of Thacker

35 Wash. 2d 605 · Washington Supreme Court · Feb 3, 1950

We assume that the only purpose of that paragraph is to establish jurisdiction and the venue of the hearing. … We are entirely satisfied that Mr. *618 Taylor’s answers established his total lack of bias or prejudice.

State v. Minor

174 P.3d 1162 · Washington Supreme Court · Jan 17, 2008

Former RCW 9.41.040(1)(a) (2003). [4] Residential burglary qualifies as a "[c]rime of violence," which is included within the definition of a "[s]erious offense" for purposes of first degree unlawful possession of a firearm … without prejudice and is not an issue on appeal. [6] In his petition for review, Minor challenged the manifest injustice disposition, arguing it was not supported by the record and that the length of the disposition was clearly

Roller v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co.

24 Wash. 2d 473 · Washington Supreme Court · Feb 19, 1946

The question clearly gets down to: Was the vehicle an automobile-or a truck? … Plaintiff called Walter Mitchell, a supervisor of repairs in a Longview auto repair shop, and qualified him as an expert witness.

In re the Estate of Bussler

160 Wash. App. 449 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Mar 8, 2011

Prior to Christmas 2008 it was observed decedent established a reasonable relationship when Kathleen visited from Hayden Lake, Idaho. … We will not interfere with a trial court’s decision to award attorney fees under RCW 11.24.050 unless there are facts and circumstances that clearly show an abuse of the trial court’s discretion.

Fouts v. Inslee

District Court, W.D. Washington · Oct 5, 2023

But Count 2 must be dismissed with prejudice 18 because the State of Washington and the Department of Corrections are both immune from suit 19 under the Eleventh Amendment. See Pennhurst St. … His unsuccessful 23 struggle to retain an attorney likewise does not qualify as an exceptional circumstance. Curbow v. 24 Clintsman, No. 2:21-cv-1420-TLF, 2021 WL 5051662, at *1 (W.D. Wash.

State v. Cheatam

150 Wash. 2d 626 · Washington Supreme Court · Dec 11, 2003

This conclusion is correct, since the jail property room was clearly not the place designated in the warrant as the place to be searched. … His shoes were clearly observable by the police during that search.

In Re the Disciplinary Proceeding Against Deming

108 Wash. 2d 82 · Washington Supreme Court · Oct 5, 1987

We would reverse these cases out of hand if they were suits of a civil nature to establish a claim against petitioners. … The commission shall establish rules of procedure for commission proceedings including due process and confidentiality of proceedings.

Bartlett v. United States

835 F. Supp. 1246 · District Court, E.D. Washington · Oct 14, 1993

Here, the court previously has determined Plaintiff established a prima facie case of discrimination by disparate treatment. … Clearly, Plaintiff has been severely affected emotionally from Defendant’s conduct and that injury is manifested by serious physical impairments. However, the court concludes, in contrast to Dr.

City of Tacoma v. Horton

62 Wash. 2d 211 · Washington Supreme Court · May 29, 1963

You're going to have to qualify it, and you're going to have to get some reason why it is admissible. Q. (by Mr. Chapin) Lieutenant, do you know where Sgt. Mathis is at this time? A. … The law respecting the waiver of immunity to search was recently summarized by United States District Judge Ben C. Dawkins, Jr., in United States v. Kidd, 153 F.