Case law

Ruiz-Guzman v. Amvac Chemical Corp.

7 P.3d 795 · Washington Supreme Court · Aug 24, 2000

Under this approach, not all products that cannot be made safer would qualify as "unavoidably unsafe" products entitled to comment k `s protection. … The defendant manufacturer sought "immunity from liability resulting from its decision to use a more flammable propellant than one that was a suspected teratogen and ozone-depleter." Id. at 980.

In Re Estate of Ehlers

80 Wash. App. 751 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Mar 5, 1996

The petitioning beneficiary must, however, demonstrate that removal is clearly necessary to save the trust property. In re Estate of Cornett, 102 Wash. 254, 264 , 173 P. 44 (1918). … In order to help ascertain the fair market value of any asset as of the date of the decedent’s death, the personal representative may hire "a qualified and disinterested person . . . .”

Rebecca Nelson v. James Duvall

197 Wash. App. 441 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jan 3, 2017

night, somewhere between seven and ten shots, which are one and a half ounces each, of hard alcohol with mixers, for a young women of her stature and age is well beyond the legal limit and clearly … when you're a good-looking lady running around on campus.[5] The court denied issuance of the sexual assault protection order checking the box with the form language: "A preponderance of the evidence has not established

Miller v. Argus Publishing Co.

79 Wash. 2d 816 · Washington Supreme Court · Nov 4, 1971

The instruction clearly permitted defendant to argue its theory of this de *823 fense to the jury. … Thus, although it would have been preferable to be more explicit, the failure to qualify the word “truth” each time it appears in the instruction was not error. Hartman v.

State v. Wilburn

51 Wash. App. 827 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jun 21, 1988

It is part of my job to advise him of his rights, to determine if he wanted and qualified for court appointed attorney, and to do what we call a "bail study." *832 Q. … Although I recognize that there was error at the trial level, the error was clearly harmless.

REX - Real Estate Exchange Inc v. Zillow Inc

District Court, W.D. Washington · Apr 22, 2022

A plaintiff must clearly allege 14 facts demonstrating every element of standing. Spokeo, Inc. v. … Under the Noerr-Pennington 4 doctrine, “those who petition any department of the government for redress are generally 5 immune from statutory liability for their petitioning conduct.” Sosa v.

Jonathan D. Clausen v. WBL SPO I, LLC

Court of Appeals of Washington · Oct 14, 2025

An LLC such as Lilac City qualifies as a “person” under RCW 31.04.015(21), which includes both individuals and business entities. … The first two elements of a CPA claim “may be established by a showing that the alleged act constitutes a per se unfair trade practice.” Hangman, 105 Wn.2d at 786.

Stallsmith v. Alderwood Water District

37 Wash. 2d 198 · Washington Supreme Court · Oct 6, 1950

All the respondent interveners, in good faith, advanced their money in reliance upon an apparently valid action of qualified municipal officers. … granted the power to establish local improvement districts within its territory.

Lincoln C. Beauregard v. Mayor Edward Murray

428 P.3d 141 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Oct 8, 2018

Plaintiff was clearly aware that his behavior was the subject of a motion, and, nevertheless, willfully and with a flagrant disregard for established legal norms, continued to file documents that were … After implicitly recognizing that Beauregard's conduct may qualify under an exception clause of RPC 3.6., the court did not frame the issue as whether his extrajudicial statements were proper.

Busselman v. Battelle Memorial Institute

District Court, E.D. Washington · Nov 15, 2019

the personnel who conduct the investigation are sufficiently independent of involvement in the event and adequately trained and qualified.” Id. 19 “[C]ontractors should . . . … To establish that she held the requisite 8 reasonable belief, Plaintiff “need not prove that the condition disclosed actually 9 established one or more of the listed categories of wrongdoing,” but instead “must 10

Sue Jin Yi And Ronald Cox v. The Kroger Co.

Court of Appeals of Washington · Feb 5, 2018

Cox's claims qualify as statutory wage claims. II. Motion To Compel Arbitration QFC first challenges the trial court's denial of the motion to compel arbitration. … The CBAs do not clearly and unmistakably waive the right to a judicial forum for Cox's statutory wage claims.

Ago

Washington Attorney General Reports · May 12, 1999

RCW 2.64.030 provides: Commission membership shall terminate if a member ceases to hold the position that qualified him or her for appointment. … Clearly, if the initial view of the facts based on the evidence derived from nonadversarial processes as a practical or legal matter foreclosed fair and effective consideration at a subsequent adversary hearing leading to

Montes v. City of Yakima

40 F. Supp. 3d 1377 · District Court, E.D. Washington · Aug 22, 2014

Thernstrom is qualified by his training and experience as a tenured professor, academic researcher, and frequently published author to offer these opinions. … As the table above clearly illustrates, there are at least five possible single-member voting districts which satisfy the numerosity requirement.

State v. King

219 P.3d 642 · Washington Supreme Court · Oct 15, 2009

Clearly, this situation presented an emergency, and Quinn reasonably responded across jurisdictional lines." … Jacobsen, 78 Wash.2d 491, 496-97 , 477 P.2d 1 (1970) (even police officers must be qualified to testify).

In Re Marler

33 P.3d 743 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Oct 22, 2001

We remand to the Board with instructions to fix a new minimum term and to delineate clearly the effect of a MAP upon accrual of statutory good time. … A decision that an inmate is conditionally parolable via a MAP does not qualify as a decision on the duration of confinement unless the MAP process occurs within a predictable time frame.

CLEAN v. City of Spokane

133 Wash. 2d 455 · Washington Supreme Court · Nov 13, 1997

The court held, on the only issue before it, that when any portion of a law addresses an emergency, the entire law is immune from referendum. 17 Since the plaintiff conceded that the appropriations provisions of the acts … Instead, this court has upheld *489 declarations of emergency only when the facts established a need for immediate response to public peril.

Lewis County v. Western Washington Growth Management Hearings Board

157 Wash. 2d 488 · Washington Supreme Court · Aug 10, 2006

of designation, marked by impervious (gravel or paved) surfaces, including buildings and sheds and storage areas) not to exceed 5 acres, which shall be available for rural commercial and industrial uses under guidelines established … Clearly, the County must take into account the need for the construction of such facilities in resource lands.

Moore v. Naph Care Inc

District Court, E.D. Washington · May 8, 2025

If satisfied, “a 14 witness qualified as an expert . . . may testify thereto in the form of an opinion.” 15 Fed. R. Evid 702. … The burden then shifts to the plaintiff to provide an affidavit from a 12 qualified medical expert witness that alleges specific facts establishing a cause of 13 action . . .

State Ex Rel. Stiner v. Yelle

174 Wash. 402 · Washington Supreme Court · Sep 8, 1933

I, § 12, of our constitution provides: “No law shall be passed granting to any citizen, class of citizens, or corporation, other than municipal, privileges or immunities which, upon the same terms, shall not equally belong … I think that the act in question is clearly unconstitutional, and therefore dissent. Mitchell, J., concurs with Steihekt, J.

Amrani v. US Bank Trust NA

District Court, W.D. Washington · Dec 30, 2019

Pa. 1978) (noting that original jurisdiction 15 does not mean exclusive jurisdiction and that state and federal courts had concurrent jurisdiction). 16 The Court also notes that Defendant does not clearly establish … action for a lack of subject matter jurisdiction. 10 Defendant claims that Plaintiff’s claims are frivolous because it is indemnified for certain actions 11 but does not explain why indemnification should be applied as immunity