Case law

Lewis v. City of Medina

87 Wash. 2d 19 · Washington Supreme Court · Apr 15, 1976

We will, however, state briefly a number of other reasons which support the action of the board and clearly demonstrate such action was not arbitrary and capricious, nor was it contrary to law. … The relevant provision contains the words “would have qualified as a building site.” The subject property would not have qualified under King County standards which required a minimum of 6,000 square feet.

Parry v. George H. Brown & Associates, Inc.

46 Wash. App. 193 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Dec 11, 1986

A communication among partners concerning a partnership lawsuit to recover money owed the partnership is clearly within this "common interest" area. … Proof of knowledge or reckless disregard as to the falsity of a statement is required to establish abuse of a qualified privilege. Guntheroth v. Rodaway, 107 Wn.2d 170 , 176 n.2, 727 P.2d 982 (1986); Bender v.

Commercial Electric Light & Power Co. v. Judson

57 L.R.A. 78 · Washington Supreme Court · Apr 6, 1899

Immunity from taxation is not one of them. Chesapeake & O. R. Co. v. Miller, 114 U. S. 186 (5 Sup. Ct. 813) ; Sterling Gas Co. v. Higby, 134 Ill. 557 ( 25 N. E. 660 ) ; Spring Valley Waterworks v. … Anderson, supra, that it is a settled principle that franchises are subject to taxation, and it is a firmly established rule in this state that all property not specifically exempt by law is subject to taxation.

Jackson v. Federal Way Police Department

District Court, W.D. Washington · Apr 22, 2024

Moreover, the Court notes that many of Plaintiff’s allegations are incomplete sentences. 10 To the extent Plaintiff’s complaint seeks relief from government officials, they are 11 entitled to qualified immunity, … To pierce 14 that immunity, Plaintiff must show a violation of a clearly established constitutional right—the 15 “contours of the right must be sufficiently clear that a reasonable official would understand that 16

Kevin P. Clare v. Telquist McMillen Clare PLLC

501 P.3d 167 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Dec 28, 2021

Restraint of Domingo, 155 Wn.2d 356, 365-66, 119 P.3d 816 (2005) (dicta in an opinion cannot establish a rule or principle and dispelling dictum does not establish a significant change in the law). … Clare is immune under the litigation privilege.

Nye v. Tapia

District Court, E.D. Washington · Sep 16, 2022

Second, the Court must decide whether the right was 12 “clearly established” at the time of the alleged misconduct. Id. … established at the time, and 7 Defendants are therefore entitled to qualified immunity.

Pacific Inland Tariff Bureau v. Schaaf

1 Wash. 2d 210 · Washington Supreme Court · Nov 4, 1939

The appellant, Pacific Inland Tariff Bureau, is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the state of Oregon, and qualified to do business in this state. … The next question is whether the appellant has been denied any privileges or immunities which others may enjoy; and, in this connection, it invokes § 12 of Art.

Walters v. Hampton

14 Wash. App. 548 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Dec 9, 1975

Respondent City supports the dismissal by asserting the doctrine of discretionary sovereign immunity, Evangelical United Brethren Church v. … His duty to prosecute “all violations of city ordinances which come-to his knowledge” clearly involves an initial determination by him that an ordinance has been violated.

Yonker v. Department of Social & Health Services

85 Wash. App. 71 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Feb 10, 1997

Neither of *80 these qualifiers necessarily means that the protected group must he small or narrow. Indeed, such is not the requirement. … The Legislature imposed a specific duty oil the Department, and the Legislature has abrogated governmental immunity (RCW 4.96.010).

Nieshe v. Concrete School District

129 Wash. App. 632 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jul 5, 2005

The superior court dismissed Nieshe’s parents as plaintiffs for lack of standing and the individual defendants based on qualified immunity. … Weisman. 32 In Lee, the Court was asked to decide whether including prayer as part of a high school graduation ceremony contravened the establishment clause of the First Amendment. 33 To be consistent with the establishment

State Ex Rel. Blankenship v. Gaines

136 Wash. 610 · Washington Supreme Court · Nov 30, 1925

Seattle, supra, holding that there is no difference in meaning between ‘■three-fifths of the voters” and “three-fifths of the qualified voters,” because the word “qualified” adds nothing, since every voter is a qualified … The repetition of the word “registered,” in describing the voters concerned in disincorp oration proceedings throughout the disineorporation statutes, clearly shows the intention of the legislature.

Matheson v. Washington State Liquor Control Board

132 Wash. App. 280 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Mar 28, 2006

Where a legitimate public interest exists, the statute “ ‘ “will be upheld unless the burden imposed on such commerce is clearly excessive in relation to the putative local benefits.” ’ ” Id. at 832 (quoting Franks & Sons … Matheson does not qualify for this exemption. See also RCW 82.24.500 (requiring a Washington wholesaler’s license to engage in cigarette distribution in this state). ¶23 While Mr.

Hanson v. Hutt

83 Wash. 2d 195 · Washington Supreme Court · Jan 17, 1974

Both cases are clearly distinguishable, since neither involves the constitutionality of a statute. … many of these women were justifiably disqualified because they voluntarily quit work, or because they were unable to work, or because they were not seeking work, or for any other reasons for which a claimant may not be qualified

Ellis v. Pierce County

District Court, W.D. Washington · Sep 26, 2022

Additionally, Redding 19 contends that he is entitled to qualified immunity because he did not violate a clearly 20 established right by deploying Zepp to bite and apprehend Ellis. Id. at 5–6. … immunity test: whether 8 the right at issue was clearly established.

Black Ball Freight Service v. Washington Utilities & Transportation Commission

77 Wash. 2d 479 · Washington Supreme Court · Dec 31, 1969

The fact of increased competition alone was no legal significance since appellants are not entitled to immunity from competition. See State ex rel. Adams Transport, Inc. v. Washington Pub. Serv. … This action was initiated before the amendment of RCW 34.04.130(6), which substituted the “clearly erroneous” test for the “material and substantial evidence” test.

Leon

District Court, E.D. Washington · Aug 13, 2026

immunity 6 because he did not violate clearly established law. … Plaintiff bears the 6 burden of identifying clearly established law under the second prong of the 7 qualified immunity analysis. Waid v.

Weldeyohannes v. State of Washington

District Court, W.D. Washington · Jun 4, 2024

9 Defendants’ qualified immunity. … According to the doctrine, individuals are 7 immune from § 1983 liability unless their conduct amounted to a “deprivation of a constitutional 8 or statutory right . . . that was clearly established at the time of the

Hansen v. Horn Rapids O.R v. Park

85 Wash. App. 424 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Mar 18, 1997

The burden is on the moving party to establish its right to judgment as a matter of law. Higgins v. Stafford, 123 Wn.2d 160, 169 , 866 P.2d 31 (1994). Mr. … Races will not be permitted to continue if there is not at least one (1) ambulance and qualified individual (as indicated above) present.

Zawacky v. County of Clark

District Court, W.D. Washington · May 16, 2023

Qualified Immunity 16 Deputy DeZubiria argues she is entitled to qualified immunity for her alleged excessive 17 use of force on Mr. Donald. (Dkt. … “[I]n the absence of binding precedent, we look to whatever decisional 2 law is available to ascertain whether the law is clearly established for qualified immunity 3 purposes, including decisions of state courts, other

State v. Turner

59 P.3d 711 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jan 31, 2003

But the trial court's descriptive findings do not establish that the court required proof of these facts to establish immediate control. … Many recent opinions addressing searches of automobiles lead away from a clearly defined set of bright line rules readily capable of being applied by police officers in the field.