Case law

Sturgis v. State of Washington

368 F. Supp. 38 · District Court, W.D. Washington · Dec 3, 1973

It is the judgment of this Court that the statutes of the State of Washington which require a State University student to establish a one-year residency within the State in order for that person to qualify as a resident student … person’ shall mean a person qualified to determine his own domicile.

Altiero v. Spokane County

District Court, E.D. Washington · Feb 12, 2025

Qualified immunity protects a law enforcement 23 “from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly 24 established … law so as to avoid qualified immunity.

Van Loo v. United States of America

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

when only one defendant is asserting qualified immunity.” … Oct. 9, 2012). 7 Defendants argue Iqbal establishes that qualified immunity “protects a defendant from 8 any discovery that could require the defendant’s involvement.” (Dkt. No. 48 at 5.)

INDOOR BILLBOARD WASHINGTON, INC. v. Integra Telecom of Washington, Inc.

170 P.3d 10 · Washington Supreme Court · Oct 18, 2007

as a PICC. ¶ 29 We conclude that because Integra is a CTC, and cannot claim immunity from CPA claims under RCW 19.86.170, and Indoor Billboard clearly alleged a valid claim under chapter 19.86 RCW, the trial court had subject … What is required to establish causation? ¶ 44 This court has yet to clearly define the proof required to establish causation in a *20 CPA claim.

Lee v. Potter

District Court, E.D. Washington · Jan 8, 2020

Lee’s alleged Fourth Amendment 8 right is clearly established. Although Mr. … Lee has failed to meet his burden to show 14 that the alleged right was clearly established, and Plaintiff’s rejects Mr.

Price v. Kitsap Transit

125 Wash. 2d 456 · Washington Supreme Court · Dec 15, 1994

This argument confuses the *463 concepts of immunity and incapacity. … The Prices’ approach would permit the trial court to circumvent, at least in part, the rule established by Washburn .

MacIas v. Department of Labor & Industries

100 Wash. 2d 263 · Washington Supreme Court · Oct 5, 1983

Appellants' evidence does establish, however, a substantial disparate impact upon a racial minority. … The confines of that right have not been clearly defined, however. Shapiro involved a 1-year waiting requirement for welfare benefits.

Delashaw v. Roberts

District Court, W.D. Washington · Aug 21, 2020

Correa were 16 not integral participants in the violation of any clearly established due process right with 17 respect to the summary suspension, they are entitled to qualified immunity on Dr. 18 Delashaw’s due process … Delashaw’s clearly 3 established Fourteenth Amendment rights, and are entitled to qualified immunity. 4 3. First Amendment Retaliation 5 Dr.

Delashaw v. Roberts

District Court, W.D. Washington · Aug 7, 2020

Correa were 16 not integral participants in the violation of any clearly established due process right with 17 respect to the summary suspension, they are entitled to qualified immunity on Dr. 18 Delashaw’s due process … Delashaw’s clearly 3 established Fourteenth Amendment rights, and are entitled to qualified immunity. 4 3. First Amendment Retaliation 5 Dr.

R W v. Columbia Basin College

District Court, E.D. Washington · Oct 4, 2019

If the court finds that the constitutional right was clearly established, but 9 that the defendant made a reasonable mistake in applying the law, then the defendant 10 is entitled to qualified immunity. Id. … Thornton are protected by qualified immunity.

Sintra, Inc. v. City of Seattle

131 Wash. 2d 640 · Washington Supreme Court · Apr 17, 1997

QUALIFIED IMMUNITY Sintra argues the trial court erred by dismissing its claims against the City's employees on summary judgment on the basis of qualified immunity for the employee's conduct before July 15, 1986. … Ex. 227. [4] The trial court dismissed all claims against the individual Defendants for actions taken prior to July 15, 1986 on the basis of qualified immunity.

Riley v. Burlington Northern, Inc.

27 Wash. App. 11 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jul 29, 1980

Consequently, the County was immune from tort liability. On that sole ground, plaintiffs' action was dismissed. We reverse. Discretionary governmental immunity in this state is an extremely limited exception. Stewart v. … (4) Does the governmental agency involved possess the requisite . . . authority *15 Only if all four questions are clearly and unequivocally answered in the affirmative, can the act, omission or decision be classified as

Jenkins v. DSHS

157 P.3d 388 · Washington Supreme Court · May 3, 2007

We have held this statute does not apply to public agencies absent a clear waiver of sovereign immunity. … Unlike the majority, I do not believe that the comparability provision clearly indicates Congress's intent with respect to the specific question before us.

Parker v. State of Washington

District Court, W.D. Washington · Jul 17, 2023

11 Under the qualified immunity doctrine, “government officials performing 12 discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as 13 their conduct does not violate clearly … The State defendants are entitled to qualified immunity. 14 The State also argues that its employees have qualified immunity from Parker’s § 15 1983 constitutional against them.

Trizuto v. Bellevue Police Department

983 F. Supp. 2d 1277 · District Court, W.D. Washington · Nov 18, 2013

Qualified immunity protects § 1983 defendants “from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known … or that the right was not “clearly established” at the time of the defendant’s violation.

Harris v. Drake

99 P.3d 872 · Washington Supreme Court · Oct 14, 2004

We hold that the report may be entitled to the qualified immunity of the work product doctrine. FACTS Doris Drake, defendant/petitioner, rearended Bradley Harris, plaintiff/respondent in April 1996. … The work product doctrine provides a qualified immunity from discovery. Under the work product doctrine, documents prepared in anticipation of litigation are discoverable only upon a showing of substantial need.

Riggins v. Bechtel Power Corp.

44 Wash. App. 244 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jul 1, 1986

Bechtel claims that through this provision Jones waived its industrial insurance immunity. Employers are generally immune from liability arising from their employees' job-related injuries. RCW 51.04-.010; McDowell v. … In Brown, at 239-40, the Supreme Court emphasized the need for clarity: We hold that an indemnity clause of this type is enforceable only if it clearly and specifically contains a waiver of the immunity of the workers' compensation

Rehn v. City of Seattle

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

Officers are entitled to qualified immunity unless 22 (1) the officers’ conduct violated a constitutional right and (2) the right which was 23 violated was clearly established at the time of the violation. … Subsequent courts addressing 8 qualified immunity for mistaken home entries have found that under Garrison, it is 9 clearly established law that “absent probable cause and exigent circumstances, a 10 warrantless

State v. Reis

Washington Supreme Court · May 7, 2015

In this context, the amended MUCA clearly establishes a tiered 10 … Instead, qualifying patients and designated providers are provided with an affirmative defense and RCW 69.51A.040 establishes the elements for raising that defense.

Confederated Tribes of the Colville Indian Reservation v. Washington

446 F. Supp. 1339 · District Court, E.D. Washington · Feb 22, 1978

of intergovernmental tax immunity. … This is clearly insufficient to establish an interference with tribal self-government. Fort Mojave Tribe v. County of San Bernardino, 543 F.2d 1253 (9th Cir. 1976), cert. denied, 430 U.S. 983 (1977).