Docket No. 86001-7
Synopsis: Whether a personal restraint petitioner alleging that his guilty plea was involuntary because he was misinformed of the maximum sentence must establish actual and substantial prejudice in order to obtain relief.
Blog Archives
Resident Action Council v. Seattle Housing Authority
Docket No. 87656-8 (from King Case No. 10-2-26188-5 SEA)
Synopsis: Whether the Seattle Housing Authority violated the Public Records Act when it disclosed previously redacted copies of public housing assistance tenant grievance decisions, and if so, whether the trial court properly ordered the Authority to create new records with fewer redactions, to provide them in electronic format, and to promulgate procedures relating to such record requests.
Synopsis: Whether the Seattle Housing Authority violated the Public Records Act when it disclosed previously redacted copies of public housing assistance tenant grievance decisions, and if so, whether the trial court properly ordered the Authority to create new records with fewer redactions, to provide them in electronic format, and to promulgate procedures relating to such record requests.
Lakey v. Puget Sound Energy
Docket No. 87679-7 (from King Case No. 10-2-32386-4 SEA)
Synopsis: Whether residential neighbors of a new Puget Sound Energy substation may bring an inverse condemnation action against the city of Kirkland to recover compensation for reduced property values without having challenged the city’s approval of the substation by land use petition, and whether the neighbors presented valid scientific evidence of the adverse health effects of electromagnetic fields enabling their nuisance suit against Puget Sound Energy to proceed.
Synopsis: Whether residential neighbors of a new Puget Sound Energy substation may bring an inverse condemnation action against the city of Kirkland to recover compensation for reduced property values without having challenged the city’s approval of the substation by land use petition, and whether the neighbors presented valid scientific evidence of the adverse health effects of electromagnetic fields enabling their nuisance suit against Puget Sound Energy to proceed.
State v. Kurtz
Docket No. 87078-1 (from Court of Appeals Division II Case No. 41568-2)
Synopsis: Whether a person who lacks authority to possess or manufacture marijuana under the Medical Use of Marijuana Act, chapter 69.51A RCW, may assert a common law medical necessity defense in a prosecution for unlawful manufacture and possession of marijuana.
Synopsis: Whether a person who lacks authority to possess or manufacture marijuana under the Medical Use of Marijuana Act, chapter 69.51A RCW, may assert a common law medical necessity defense in a prosecution for unlawful manufacture and possession of marijuana.
Skagit County Public Hospital District No. 304 v. Skagit County Public Hospital District No. 1
Docket No. 86796-8 (from Skagit Case No. 11-2-00816-1)
Synopsis: Whether a public hospital district may operate a medical clinic within another district’s territorial boundaries without the other district’s permission.
Synopsis: Whether a public hospital district may operate a medical clinic within another district’s territorial boundaries without the other district’s permission.
State v. Tyler
Docket No. 87104-3 (from Court of Appeals Division II Case No. 40634-9)
Synopsis: Whether consent is required to conduct an inventory search of a vehicle prior to impoundment, and if not, whether the purported inventory search here was a pretext for a search for evidence otherwise unlawful under Arizona v. Gant, 556 U.S. 332, 129 S. Ct. 1710, 173 L. Ed. 2d 485 (2009).
Synopsis: Whether consent is required to conduct an inventory search of a vehicle prior to impoundment, and if not, whether the purported inventory search here was a pretext for a search for evidence otherwise unlawful under Arizona v. Gant, 556 U.S. 332, 129 S. Ct. 1710, 173 L. Ed. 2d 485 (2009).
P.E. Systems v. CPI Corporation
Docket No. 86936-7 (from Court of Appeals Division III Case No. 29411-1)
Synopsis: Whether a trial court erroneously dismissed a breach of contract claim on the pleadings without converting the motion to dismiss to a summary judgment proceeding when the court considered the disputed agreement, and if so, whether the Court of Appeals in reversing the dismissal order erroneously directed the trial court to enter judgment in favor of the plaintiff.
Synopsis: Whether a trial court erroneously dismissed a breach of contract claim on the pleadings without converting the motion to dismiss to a summary judgment proceeding when the court considered the disputed agreement, and if so, whether the Court of Appeals in reversing the dismissal order erroneously directed the trial court to enter judgment in favor of the plaintiff.
Saleemi v. Doctor’s Associates
Docket No. 87062-4 (from Court of Appeals Division II Case No. 40351-0)
Synopsis: Whether a party who did not seek discretionary review of a trial court ruling ordering arbitration in Washington and invalidating a contractual choice of venue clause must demonstrate prejudice from arbitration in this state in order to challenge the ruling on appeal from a judgment confirming the arbitration award.
Synopsis: Whether a party who did not seek discretionary review of a trial court ruling ordering arbitration in Washington and invalidating a contractual choice of venue clause must demonstrate prejudice from arbitration in this state in order to challenge the ruling on appeal from a judgment confirming the arbitration award.
Manary v. Anderson
Docket No. 86776-3 (from Court of Appeals Division I Case No. 65821-2)
Synopsis: Whether a devise by will of a residence that had previously been transferred to a revocable living trust served to revoke the terms of the trust under RCW 11.11.003(1) even though the will did not mention the trust.
Synopsis: Whether a devise by will of a residence that had previously been transferred to a revocable living trust served to revoke the terms of the trust under RCW 11.11.003(1) even though the will did not mention the trust.
State v. Ruem
Docket No. 86214-1 (from Court of Appeals Division II Case No. 39053-1)
Synopsis: Whether police officers seeking consent to enter a defendant’s home to execute an arrest warrant on the defendant’s brother were required to advise the defendant of his right to refuse consent under State v. Ferrier, 136 Wn.2d 262, 960 P.2d 927 (1998).
Synopsis: Whether police officers seeking consent to enter a defendant’s home to execute an arrest warrant on the defendant’s brother were required to advise the defendant of his right to refuse consent under State v. Ferrier, 136 Wn.2d 262, 960 P.2d 927 (1998).