Case law

State of Washington, Dept. of Natural Resources v. PUD 1 of Klickitat County

Court of Appeals of Washington · Apr 30, 2015

In 1931, the legislature authorized the establishment of public utility districts. LAWS OF 1931, ch. 1, § 2. … But the definitions appearing in RCW 76.04.760 "only apply throughout this section ... unless the context clearly requires otherwise."

Doe v. Reed

661 F. Supp. 2d 1194 · District Court, W.D. Washington · Sep 10, 2009

Exemptions to the Public Records Act must either be included in the act itself, or clearly expressed in another statute. RCW 42.56.070(1). … argues as follows: Absent access to the names of persons who signed referendum petitions, the public would not be able to independently examine whether the State acted properly in determining whether a referendum measure qualified

Powell v. Colvin

District Court, E.D. Washington · Jan 9, 2025

But tasks that aren’t essential, integral, or expected parts of a job are less likely to qualify as apparent conflicts that the 7 ALJ must ask about. … Policy Management Systems 4 Corp.38 states clearly that the ADA and Social Security Act do not inherently 5 conflict and can reasonably co-exist.

BELLEAU WOODS II, LLC v. City of Bellingham

208 P.3d 5 · Court of Appeals of Washington · May 26, 2009

Credit for the dedication of land shall be valued at fair market value established by private appraisers acceptable to the City. … of the ordinance does not require such an interpretation. ¶ 18 The hearing examiner ended by ruling that park "impact fees for the subject development shall be paid in accordance with BMC Chapter 19.04, with credit for qualifying

Barr v. American Cyanamid Co.

808 F. Supp. 752 · District Court, W.D. Washington · Dec 8, 1992

This claim clearly “has a connection with” and makes “reference to” a benefit plan. Id. II. … (docket no. 24), at 25-26 (confirms that “severance payments would be paid in addition to whatever benefits a person was qualified to receive from the company’s pension plan”).

Personal Restraint Petition Of: Shane Ammel Lynn

Court of Appeals of Washington · Oct 20, 2025

Separately, our review of the record and opinion on Lynn’s direct appeal establishes that as a re- presentation, this issue is clearly frivolous for that very reason. See RAP 16.8.1(b). … Our Supreme Court has clearly established that a “defendant is not entitled to challenge the information on appeal if [they] failed to request a bill of particulars at an earlier time.” Id.

Mitchell v. Washington State Institute of Public Policy

153 Wash. App. 803 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Dec 22, 2009

. ¶18 The process server license King County issued clearly states, “MCS Global Inc[.] for: Kevin Michael Mitchell.” CP at 83 (emphasis omitted). … Finally, Mitchell claims that he is due statutory attorney fees. ¶42 The statutory attorney fee is clearly not improper.

In re the Welfare of Shantay C.J.

121 Wash. App. 926 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jun 8, 2004

Burdge further testified that the parents were on a waiting list to get into therapeutic daycare but, due to drug use or incarceration, the parents did not qualify for the program. … (f) That continuation of the parent and child relationship clearly diminishes that child’s prospects for early integration into a stable and permanent home.

Petters v. Williamson & Associates, Inc.

151 Wash. App. 154 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jul 6, 2009

It is well established, however, that “[a] plaintiff seeking to establish a trade secrets claim under the uniform act [5] has the burden of proving that legally protectable secrets exist.” Boeing Co. v. … The plaintiff has the burden of establishing the defendant’s sales; the defendant has the burden of establishing any portion of the sales not attributable to the trade secret and any expenses to be deducted in determining

Lindsay & Keith Mcginnis, V. Advance Recovery Systems

Court of Appeals of Washington · Dec 30, 2025

The common interest privilege clearly applies to these communications. … Because McGinnis has failed to establish a genuine issue of material fact that Roa made the statements with actual malice, the Defendants are entitled to the protections of the qualified common interest privilege.

Yu

District Court, W.D. Washington · Aug 4, 2026

The burden then shifts to the non-moving party to establish a genuine issue of 19 material fact. Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co. v. Zenith Radio Corp., 475 U.S. 574, 587 (1986). … Accordingly, the Court need 2 not reach Defendant’s alternative argument that he is entitled to qualified immunity. 3 III.

Railcar Management LLC v. Cedar AI, Inc

District Court, W.D. Washington · Jan 30, 2023

The exhibit does not itself, however, 19 establish how or to whom it was accessible. … Richard Feiner & Co., 896 3 F.2d 1542, 1550 (9th Cir. 1990) (“Judgment on the pleadings is proper when the moving party clearly establishes on the face of the pleadings that no material issue of fact remains 4 to be

Johnson v. McClure

5 Wash. 2d 123 · Washington Supreme Court · Aug 9, 1940

Johnson was appointed trustee in the will and qualified as such. *126 Jennie Weeks died September 29, 1936, and Jay G. McCrary was appointed administrator of her estate. … In deciding the case, it was said: “It is a question of the testator’s intention, and the intention to give to this annuity the nature of a specific legacy, payable only out of income, must be clearly established.

State v. Rupe

108 Wash. 2d 734 · Washington Supreme Court · Sep 17, 1987

Knowledge of prior proceedings alone is insufficient to establish juror bias. Patton v. Yount, supra at 1035 . … (Significantly, however, much of the questioning was concerned with death qualifying the jury, rather than with the effect of publicity.)

Peninsula Counseling Center v. Rahm

105 Wash. 2d 929 · Washington Supreme Court · May 29, 1986

Both of these interests clearly are implicated in this appeal. … This information clearly is of the type that a patient would desire to keep private.

Kesler v. Puget Sound & Pacific Railroad

District Court, W.D. Washington · Jan 31, 2022

The party 23 24 1 offering expert testimony bears the burden of establishing … He explains in his report how he reached that conclusion, see Dkt. 39-2 at 3 28–29, and it is not clearly the result of unsubstantiated beliefs or speculation.

Hendrix v. City of Seattle

76 Wash. 2d 142 · Washington Supreme Court · Jun 5, 1969

It is imperative that guidelines for those bodies be articulated clearly and with reference to actual social realities and objectives involved. … Ct. 1444 (1968) simply established that jury trial for certain offenses was a fundamental right.

State Of Washington v. Tamas Hibszki

Court of Appeals of Washington · Apr 13, 2015

App. 766, 772, 247 P.3d 11 (2011) (holding even if a locomotive is not a "railway car" it still qualifies as a "building" under the ordinary meaning of the term); State v. Tyson. 33 Wn. … Jury Instructions Hibszki asserts the jury instructions did not clearly state that the State has the burden of proving accomplice liability beyond a reasonable doubt.

Bekins v. Fidelity Savings & Loan Ass'n

179 Wash. 519 · Washington Supreme Court · Dec 4, 1934

That case involved the right of creditors to maintain actions to establish claims against funds accumulated by a trustee in the administration of a bankrupt estate, in another court than those in which independent actions … in possession of the ■mortgaged property, and the possession of the receiver and trustee was likewise lawful; but the lien of the mortgage was not affected in any way by the bankruptcy, as the eases in the Supreme Court clearly

State v. Riofta

209 P.3d 467 · Washington Supreme Court · Jun 11, 2009

The prosecutor presented evidence of Riofta's link to the Trang Dai defendants to establish motive for the shooting. … Our statute was drafted to qualify Washington for federal funding under the Justice For All Act of 2004. Pub.L. No. 108-405, 118 Stat. 2260, 2261-62.