Case law

Dexter v. Spokane County Health District

76 Wash. App. 372 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Dec 15, 1994

At least one jurisdiction recognizes a claim when the fact of perjury has been established in criminal proceedings. Andrews v. Steinberg, 122 Misc. 2d 468, 477-78 , 471 N.Y.S.2d 764, 772 (1983). … The issue of witness immunity usually arises in the defamation context. Bruce , however, rejected such limitation. All witnesses are immune from all claims arising out of all testimony. Bruce , at 131-34.

State v. Kroll

87 Wash. 2d 829 · Washington Supreme Court · Dec 16, 1976

instruction placed an unconstitutional burden of proof on the defendant: “ ‘In all cases where the unlawful killing is proved beyond a reasonable doubt, and where there is nothing *840 in the circumstances of the case to explain, qualify … It is not necessary to establish intent by direct and positive evidence but intent may be established by inference and in the same way as any other fact by taking into consideration the acts of the parties and all the facts

Mark A. Hiesterman, Appellant/cross-res V. Wa State Dept. Of Health, Respondent/cross-app

Court of Appeals of Washington · Feb 22, 2023

with business expectancy, and invasion of privacy. 4 For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/. 54171-8-II established … First, Hiesterman’s claim that RCW 18.130.300 violates article I, section 8 of the Washington Constitution clearly suggests a constitutional issue.

Fine Arts Guild, Inc. v. City of Seattle

74 Wash. 2d 503 · Washington Supreme Court · Sep 26, 1968

It has been well observed that such [lewd and obscene] utterances are no essential part of any exposition of ideas, and are of such slight social value as a step to truth that any benefit that may be derived from them is clearly … were not absolutely prohibited, particularly in the area of obscenity which, by its nature, forms no essential part of any exposition of ideas, and is of such insignificant social value that any benefit to be derived is clearly

Haworth v. City of Walla Walla

District Court, E.D. Washington · Jun 11, 2020

ECF No. 19 at 15-18. 8 Qualified immunity shields government actors from civil damages unless 9 their conduct violates “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of 10 which a … “Only when an officer’s conduct violates a clearly 7 established constitutional right – when the officer should have known he was 8 violating the Constitution – does he forfeit qualified immunity.”

Reyes v. Yakima Health Dist.

419 P.3d 819 · Washington Supreme Court · Jun 21, 2018

Keck for follow up care, the records establish that the surgeons were sending Ms. … The invocation of a legal privilege does not per se immunize one's conduct from a claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress.

Hueter v. Haaland

District Court, W.D. Washington · Sep 24, 2021

Similarly, courts may dismiss based on qualified 24 immunity under § 1915(e)(2)(B)(iii) “if it is clear from the complaint that the plaintiff can 25 present no evidence that could overcome a defense of qualified immunity … 13 American Samoa,1 in violation of clearly established law as needed to defeat qualified immunity. 14 See Chavez, 817 F.3d at 1169; Ziglar v.

Blocktree Props., LLC v. Pub. Util. Dist. No. 2 of Grant Cnty. Wash., Mun. Corp.

380 F. Supp. 3d 1102 · District Court, E.D. Washington · Mar 29, 2019

The District is a municipal corporation established pursuant to Washington statutes. Wash. Rev. Code § 54.04.020 . … privilege or immunity.

Snedigar v. Hoddersen

114 Wash. 2d 153 · Washington Supreme Court · Feb 22, 1990

Clampitt concerned a party's attempt to defeat a reporter's qualified privilege. … If clearly necessary, the trial court may make this decision following an in camera inspection of the requested information.

State v. Solomon

5 Wash. App. 412 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Jul 19, 1971

It is, therefore, clearly established that when the witness is properly unavailable, his prior testimony can be admitted at a subsequent trial consistent with the Sixth Amendment if, at the previous hearing, there was adequate … This was sufficient evidence to establish rightful possession by the police department.

Chambers

District Court, W.D. Washington · Sep 8, 2026

Defendants argue that both are entitled to qualified immunity. Dkt. … A court may take qualified immunity’s two prongs “in whichever order would 18 expedite resolution of the case.” Morales v.

Limit v. Maleng

874 F. Supp. 1138 · District Court, W.D. Washington · Oct 17, 1994

But plaintiffs point out that defendants have shown no evidence of fraud linked to the payment per signature method of compensating signature gatherers. 3 Plaintiffs insist that, pursuant to Meyer, defendants must establish … Defendants’ contention that they are immune from any liability to plaintiff is equally without merit.

Parker v. State of Washington

District Court, W.D. Washington · May 16, 2022

and (2) whether the “right at issue was ‘clearly established’ at 7 the time of defendant’s alleged misconduct.” … Ficek violated his constitutional right, the Court need 22 not address the second qualified immunity question: whether that right was clearly established. 1 suggesting that the City’s training program was deficient or

Northwestern National Insurance v. Fishback

130 Wash. 490 · Washington Supreme Court · Aug 7, 1924

without due process; and that the right to contract for one’s services in a lawful calling is a right guaranteed by the constitution; and that, under the constitution, every individual is entitled to all privileges and immunities … times receive fair and equitable treatment; it is merely an interference with what has always been one of the ordinary businesses engaged in by whoever saw fit to do so; it prescribes no mental or moral qualifications, establishes

Meaney v. Dodd

111 Wash. 2d 174 · Washington Supreme Court · Jul 15, 1988

Although the Legislature abolished sovereign immunity for municipal corporations in 1967, 2 it did not thereby create any new causes of action or liability. J & B Dev. Co. v. … No special relationship was established giving rise to an actionable duty. In light of our decision, we need not address the issues of immunity and exhaustion of remedies raised by the County.

Life Designs Ranch, Inc. v. Michael Sommer

191 Wash. App. 320 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Nov 12, 2015

The Supreme Court wrote: The imputation of a criminal offense involving moral turpitude has been held to be clearly libelous per se. Ward v. Painters’ Local 300, 41 Wn.2d 859 , 252 P.2d 253 (1953). … This argument would be dispositive only if Life Designs failed to establish defamation per se.

Lowe's Home Centers, Llc v. Dept. Of Revenue, State Of Wa

425 P.3d 959 · Court of Appeals of Washington · Sep 5, 2018

All marketing and promotional materials given to customers had to “clearly disclose that Bank is the owner and creditor on all Accounts.” CP at 134. … Under article I, section 12 of the Washington Constitution, “[n]o law shall be passed granting to any citizen, class of citizens, or corporation . . . privileges or immunities which upon the same terms shall not equally

Shopbell v. Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife

District Court, W.D. Washington · Feb 18, 2021

not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional 14 rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … right was not clearly established at the time.

Potter v. Washington State Patrol

166 P.3d 684 · Washington Supreme Court · Aug 30, 2007

The State argues that Savage is inapplicable as a qualified immunity case. It suggests that to rely on Savage would erode a distinction between privileges and immunities. … Page Keeton ed., 5th ed.1984) (stating that privileges involve justifiable motives, while an immunity permits no inquiry into motives)). ¶ 13 The suggested distinction between privileges and immunities is not undermined by

Herron v. Tribune Publishing Co.

108 Wash. 2d 162 · Washington Supreme Court · May 7, 1987

The reason ... for granting absolute immunity is not free speech or public welfare alone. . . . … Regardless of the reasonableness of Herron's actions, the odd posture of the petition was clearly a matter of important public interest.