Case law

State Of Washington v. Leonel Gonzalez

Court of Appeals of Washington · Jan 17, 2018

This does not include qualifying patients with a valid authorization. … Marijuana is clearly included in the definition of a controlled substance for purposes of ch. RCW 69.50 RCW. See RCW 69.50.101(e); RCW 69.50.204(c)(22); 21 C.F.R. § 1308.11(d)(23).

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

In Re Estate of Bussler

247 P.3d 821 · 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.

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.

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

State v. Price

109 P.3d 27 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Mar 30, 2005

But Price was required to establish likely prejudice; the burden is not on the court. … Sheaffer, was established by introducing the 1998 criminal complaint, the injury was established by the deputy's testimony, and Price's culpability was established by sufficient evidence in his statement on plea of guilty

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.

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.

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.

State v. Stubsjoen

48 Wash. App. 139 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jun 8, 1987

The rule merely enunciates our long-standing practice of addressing error where justice clearly demands we do so. … The verdict establishes that the jury found beyond a reasonable doubt that there had been an intentional abduction.

Thurston County v. WESTERN WASH. BD.

154 P.3d 959 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Apr 3, 2007

Nonetheless, the Board need not defer to a county decision that is clearly an erroneous application of the Act. … In making this designation, counties must consider guidelines established by the Department of Community, Trade, and Economic Development. RCW 36.70A.170(2).

Henderson Homes, Inc. v. City of Bothell

124 Wash. 2d 240 · Washington Supreme Court · Jul 21, 1994

We will summarize or paraphrase other findings of fact which demonstrate clearly that there was a total lack of compliance with the statute. … (c) If the developer qualifies the response in any way pursue it until the 'damning admission’ is elicited.

Lubers v. Hinson

District Court, W.D. Washington · Feb 27, 2024

not violate Plaintiff’s 12 Constitutional rights”; (2) “the Younger doctrine bars Plaintiff’s claims”; (3) “Officers are 13 entitled to Qualified … Immunity”; and (4) “there is no Monell claim[.]”5 Dkt. # 11 at 4–9. 14 III DISCUSSION

Kay L. Pruczinski et vir v. Allen Ashby et ux

Court of Appeals of Washington · Feb 12, 2015

We examine our statutes to determine whether Trooper Ashby was both qualified to arrest in Washington, and whether his arrest of Ms. Pruczinski was lawful. Authority to arrest. … In the end, the trial court granted Trooper Ashby's CR 12{b)(2) dismissal motion for lack of personal jurisdiction, clearly doing so as a matter of comity and fundamental fairness. I would affirm.

Harris v. Department of Labor & Industries

120 Wash. 2d 461 · Washington Supreme Court · Jan 21, 1993

Accordingly, the Department *485 has established procedures for placing the worker on the pension rolls retroactively. Clerk's Papers, at 39. … Congress intended for qualified workers to receive federal benefits upon their retirement, unless specific provisions of the Social Security Act provide otherwise.

Washington State Labor Council v. Reed

65 P.3d 1203 · Washington Supreme Court · Apr 3, 2003

The secretary of state then certified Referendum 53 as supported by a sufficient number of signatures of registered voters to qualify for the November 5, 2002, ballot. … Because of our abiding devotion to separation of powers, we must ask, where is the check if the legislature is at leave, without effective review, to declare any law immune from the people's constitutional power of referendum

Roberson v. Perez

96 P.3d 420 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Aug 3, 2004

We also very clearly requested any internal documents relevant to an investigation of [Detective] Perez. " CP at 1451 (emphasis added). Mr. … The plaintiffs' discovery requests that are the subject of the sanction were clearly addressed to the City of Wenatchee alone.

State v. Applin

116 Wash. App. 818 · Court of Appeals of Washington · May 5, 2003

Crenshaw and Cameron together thus establish that no definition should ordinarily be given. 24 While an instruction such as that given in Potter specifically referencing the ability to understand an act was morally wrong … Gustafson stated on cross-examination that he believed Applin clearly knew his acts were against “the civil law,” but couldn’t say whether, at the time of the alleged murder, Applin “possessed the ability to tell right from

Valentine v. Portland Timber & Land Holding Co.

15 Wash. App. 124 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Mar 22, 1976

Clearly, due process requires a “day in court” before property interests can be extinguished. … Even assuming arguendo that the amount of Olson’s bid represents the amount of his judgment, we are not persuaded that the mortgagee at a foreclosure sale cannot qualify as a bona fide purchaser for value.

State v. Larson

Washington Supreme Court · Dec 24, 2015

As an example, we point to RCW 9A.52.060, also discussed further below, in which the legislature clearly criminalized possession of burglar tools "under circumstances evincing an intent to use" and "knowing that the same … But in Cenatis, use of a "booster bag" was found to qualify as an "antishoplifting or inventory control device countermeasure." Cenatis, 120 So. 3d at 43-44.