Case law

Rathod v. Providence Health & Services

District Court, W.D. Washington · Nov 21, 2022

Zimmer to establish 15 both the standard of care and causation. Dr. … Corporate Liability 4 5 The United States has not waived its sovereign immunity for claims

State Of Washington, V. Maxmillion D. Wilson

Court of Appeals of Washington · Sep 29, 2025

I don’t anticipate, frankly, even qualifying her as an expert. … Examples of such unusual circumstances include questions “‘in deliberate disregard of the trial court’s ruling,’ or ‘an objection by itself would be so damaging as to be immune from any admonition or curative instruction

Colacurcio v. City of Kent

944 F. Supp. 1470 · District Court, W.D. Washington · Nov 1, 1996

The patron can see and hear the dancer more clearly, and has a better opportunity to smell the “breath, perfume and the scent of the body.” Plaintiffs’ Supplemental Brief at 7. … McLaughlin has no specialized knowledge, skill, training, education, or experience that would qualify him to offer an opinion on the purpose of the ordinance.

York v. Wahkiakum School District No. 200

163 Wash. 2d 297 · Washington Supreme Court · Mar 13, 2008

Clearly, the rights of minors are not coextensive with those of adults. … The state may enact reasonable regulations to protect the public health and safety of schoolchildren, and compulsory immunization is a permissible exercise of the state’s police power. Zucht v.

Rekhter v. Dep't of Soc. & Health Servs.

Washington Supreme Court · Apr 3, 2014

Pillsbury Non-Qualified Pension Plan, 458 F.3d 748 (8th Cir. 2006), is misplaced. … DSHS's timely notice of appeal clearly encompassed the trial court's ruling on the client class.

Green v. State of Washington

District Court, W.D. Washington · Feb 16, 2021

of discretion; prosecutors not necessarily 15 immune for actions prior to advocacy like gathering evidence or providing legal advice to 16 the police). … Therefore, as any amendment of Green’s claims is not clearly futile, the 20 Court grants leave to amend. 21 Green also alleges that the State violated a variety of provisions

Canal Station Condominium Assn, Resp. v. Ballard Leary Phase Ii, Lp, Et Ano.

Court of Appeals of Washington · Dec 23, 2013

In the alternative, Ballard Leary requested that the trial court bifurcate the case and stay the premature issues until the Association established liability and damages. … as "affiliates" of the Declarant, and/or pursuant to RCW 19.40.011(7) qualify as "insiders" of Declarant and one another.

Pacific Coast Steel Co. v. Old National Bank

134 Wash. 457 · Washington Supreme Court · May 13, 1925

An assignment so qualified is not an appropriation of tbe fund. Under such an assignment, as pointed out in First Nat. Bank v. … In this case tbe payment bas not been made, and there is notice of adverse claims such as, under tbe language of tbe contract and tbe assignment, are entitled to preference. ’ ‘ ‘ This lang-uage clearly indicates that, bad

Curtis v. Inslee

District Court, W.D. Washington · Jan 23, 2024

Inslee was entitled to qualified immunity. Id. at 6 13-15. This order adopts the reasoning from the December 21, 2023 order on all federal claims. 7 The state law claims against Gov. Inslee were also dismissed. … “Instead, the 4 plaintiff must establish some other nexus sufficient to make it fair to attribute liability to the 5 private entity.” Id. This the Plaintiffs have not done.

Moore v. Robinhood Financial LLC

District Court, W.D. Washington · Jul 29, 2022

Designations 17 that are shown to be clearly unjustified or that have been made for an improper purpose (e.g., to 18 unnecessarily encumber or delay the case development process or to impose unnecessary 19 expenses … Except as otherwise provided in this 25 agreement (see, e.g., Section 5.3 below), or as otherwise stipulated or ordered, disclosure of 26 discovery material that qualifies for protection under this agreement must be clearly

State Of Washington, V. Brittney Carol Gustaitis

Court of Appeals of Washington · Apr 16, 2024

Id. 7 No. 57153-6-II In order to lay a foundation for admission, appropriate testimony by a custodian or other qualified witness is required to establish the … Here, the State failed to establish the foundational requirements to admit Helser’s testimony under the business records exception. Helser is not a records custodian or other qualified witness.

In Re The Guardianship Of: W.c.

Court of Appeals of Washington · Jun 23, 2026

that a guardian from another jurisdiction has the highest priority: Except as otherwise provided in subsection (3) of this section, the court in appointing a guardian for an adult shall consider persons qualified … Corona clearly has significant emotional and personal investment in W.C.’s care, Corona has not established a pecuniary or personal right that was substantially affected by the superior court’s order appointing a successor

State v. Swan

114 Wash. 2d 613 · Washington Supreme Court · Jun 22, 1990

The trial court denied the motion for a new trial, concluding that the presence of a Josh in the day-care center was something that was clearly discoverable in advance of trial. … Ascertaining *653 whether the rebuttal evidence is in reply to new matters established by the defense, however, is a difficult matter at times.

State v. Warner

125 Wash. 2d 876 · Washington Supreme Court · Feb 23, 1995

It is likely, however, any state employee that is conducting a "custodial interrogation” would probably qualify as a state agent for these purposes. … Where the examination is conducted for purpose of providing a third party with information, there is clearly no confidentiality anticipated or expected. J.N. v. Bellingham Sch. Dist. 501, 74 Wn.

St. Francis Extended Health Care v. Department of Social & Health Services

115 Wash. 2d 690 · Washington Supreme Court · Dec 6, 1990

Francis, the lessors had the 4.5 acres appraised by a qualified appraiser. *693 That parcel was appraised at $1,176,000 as of April 7, 1984. … decision are: (a) in violation of constitutional provisions; or (b) in excess of the statutory authority or jurisdiction of the agency; or (c) made upon unlawful procedure; or (d) affected by other error of law; or (e) clearly

State v. Jones

149 P.3d 636 · Washington Supreme Court · Dec 28, 2006

U.S.C. § 924 (e), a later court could look to police reports or complaint applications in determining whether a guilty plea in an earlier criminal proceeding formed the basis for a conviction of "generic" burglary, thereby qualifying … Apprendi , to say that Almendarez-Torres clearly authorizes a judge to resolve the dispute." Id. at 25, 125 S.Ct. 1254 . ¶ 27 Police reports and complaint applications are not at issue here.

United States v. Spokane Fuel Dealers Credit Ass'n

55 F. Supp. 387 · District Court, E.D. Washington · Apr 17, 1944

If Congress had desired to grant any further immunity, Congress doubtless would have said so.” … This legislative record clearly demonstrates the recognition by Congress of the relationship between intrastate transactions in coal and interstate transactions.

Allan Margitan, et ux v. Spokane Reg'l Health Dist.

Court of Appeals of Washington · Jul 24, 2018

The purpose of RCW 4.96.010 is to abolish sovereign immunity. Meaney v. Dodd, 111 Wn.2d 174, 178, 759 P.2d 455 (1988). … “[A] plaintiff in Washington may establish an improper means by . . . establishing a set of facts that raises an inference that the defendant was motivated by considerations outside the scope of the party’s obligations,

Allen v. Dameron

Washington Supreme Court · Feb 2, 2017

Dameron IV eta/., No. 93056-2 vice principal, or agent" and a willful withholding of wages to establish liability). … The legislature clearly and expressly included within that statute the mental element of"[w]illful[ness] and ... intent to deprive." RCW 49.52.050(2).

Department of Social & Health Services v. Olver

131 Wash. 2d 104 · Washington Supreme Court · Jan 9, 1997

The Department maintains that the statute clearly contemplates recovery from probate estates and not from recipients themselves. … Changes in legislation may affect a "mere expectation” that one is qualified to receive future benefits. See Lawson v.