Blog Archives

Stafne v. Snohomish County

by

Docket No. 84894-7 (from Court of Appeals Division I Case No. 62843-7)  Facts:  Respondent Scott Stafne petitioned the Snohomish County Council for a redesignation of forest land that he had recently acquired.  After the council declined to act on Stafne’s request, Stafne filed a Land Use Petition Act (Washington Revised Code §36.70C) petition in the Superior Court for Skagit County.  The superior court denied the petition, ruling that the decision to amend a comprehensive plan is a legislative act that cannot be compelled by a court and that a petitioner alleging non-compliance with the Growth Management Act (Washington Revised Code §36.70A) must exhaust their administrative remedies by seeking review with their local growth management hearing board before seeking judicial review.  Upon appeal, the Washington Court of Appeals affirmed in part and reversed in part, holding that Stafne’s petition was untimely but that Stafne was not required to exhaust his administrative remedies by seeking review with his local growth management hearing board because such review would have been futile. Continue reading →

Washington v. Comenout

by

Docket No. 85067-4 (from Pierce Case No. 08-1-04680-1 & 08-1-04682-8)  Facts:  Petitioner Robert Comenout, an enrolled member of the Tulalip Tribes, operates the Indian Country Store on trust allotment land located outside of the boundaries of any Indian reservation.  Comenout was charged in the Superior Court for Pierce County with engaging in the business of selling cigarettes without a license, unlawful possession or transportation of unstamped cigarettes, and theft.  Comenout moved to dismiss the charges on grounds that the state of Washington lacks jurisdiction.  The trial court denied the motion. Continue reading →

Feil v. Eastern Washington Growth Management Hearings Board

by

Docket No. 84369-4 (from Court of Appeals Division III Case No. 28248-1)  Facts:  Petitioner Jack Feil petitioned the Eastern Washington Growth Management Hearings Board to reverse a Douglas County hearing examiner’s decision permitting the construction of a pedestrian and bicycle trail on land abutting an orchard owned by Feil, asserting that the construction of the trail would undermine the conservation of agricultural land in violation of the Growth Management Act (Washington Revised Code §36.70A). Continue reading →

Williams v. Leone & Keeble, Inc.

by

Docket No. 83743-1 (from Court of Appeals Division III Case No. 27701-1)   Facts: Petitioner Delbert Williams was injured while working on a construction project in Idaho for which respondent Leone & Keeble, Inc. was the general contractor.  After reporting his injuries to the Idaho State Insurance Fund, which deemed the injury compensable, Williams began receiving workers’ compensation payments.  Williams subsequently filed suit against Leone & Keeble in the Superior Court for Spokane County, which granted Leone & Keeble’s motion to dismiss the case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Continue reading →

Washington v. Cayenne

by

Docket No. 80499-1 (from Court of Appeals Division II Case No. 34563-3)  Facts: Respondent Gerald Cayenne, a member of the Chehalis Indian Tribe and resident of the Chehalis Indian Reservation, was convicted of unlawful use of nets to take fish in the Superior Court for Grays Harbor County and prohibited from possessing gill nets as a condition of his sentence. Cayenne subsequently appealed the trial court’s order, asserting that the trial court exceeded its authority to impose a crime related prohibition insofar as the prohibition restricts his ability to fish while on the reservation. Continue reading →

Brown v. Owen

by

Docket No. 81287-0 (from Original Case No. Action)  Facts: Prior to a vote being taken in the Washington State Senate regarding final passage of Senate Bill 6931, which would have increased the tax applied to liquor sales, Lieutenant Governor Brad Owen ruled that a two thirds majority would be required to pass the bill in order to comply with Initiative 960 Continue reading →

Residents Opposed to Kittitas Turbines v. State Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council

by

Docket No. 81332-9  Facts: In separate actions, petitioners Residents Opposed to Kittitas Turbines and Kittitas County sought judicial review of respondents State Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council and Governor Christine Gregoire’s final decision authorizing the preemption of Kittitas County laws to permit the construction and operation of wind turbines for energy production by Horizon Wind Energy, L.L.C. Continue reading →

Sales v. Weyerhaeuser Company

by

Docket No. 80472-9 (from Court of Appeals Division II Case No. 35247-8)  Facts: Alleging that his exposure to asbestos carried home by his father while his father was employed by petitioner Weyerhaeuser Company caused him to develop mesothelioma, respondent Charles Sales filed suit against Weyerhaeuser Company in the Superior Court for Pierce County. Weyerhaeuser Company subsequently filed a motion to dismiss the case for forum non conveniens on grounds that Arkansas is a more convenient forum than Washington Continue reading →

Indoor Billboard, Inc. v. Integra Telecom of Washington, Inc.

by

Docket No. 79977-6  Facts:  Asserting violations of the Consumer Protection Act (Washington Revised Code §19.86), petitioner Indoor Billboard, Inc. filed suit against respondent Integra Telecom of Washington, Inc. in the Superior Court for King County.  Indoor Billboard alleged that Integra Telecom engaged in an unfair or deceptive practice by charging its Washington local service customers a surcharge that it falsely labeled as a presubscribed interexchange carrier charge (a type of surcharge permitted under Federal Communications Commission regulations).  The superior court granted summary judgment for Integra Telecom, ruling that Indoor Billboard failed as a matter of law to establish that Integra Telecom engaged in an unfair or deceptive practice and that the voluntary payment doctrine bars Indoor Billboard’s claim in any event. Continue reading →