Case In the Matter of the Disciplinary Proceeding Against Shakespear N. Feyissa Court Supreme Court of Washington (En Banc) Date […]
Case Geoffrey G. McLellan and Jackson W. Holloway v. Nicholas W. Brown, Attorney General, Washington State Court Supreme Court of
Case Reynaldo S. Verduzco v. King County, Washington Court Supreme Court of the State of Washington (En Banc) Date Decided
Case Right Now Heating, Cooling & Plumbing, LLC d/b/a Trademark Heating & Cooling v. Estate of Gerald D. Hall, by
Case State of Washington v. Nigel Sinclair Hogan Sr. Court Supreme Court of the State of Washington (En Banc) Date
The Washington Court of Appeals, Division II, affirmed Pierce County’s approval of a Tacoma Rescue Mission shared housing village, holding that (1) the county’s density formula counting each sleeping unit as 0.25 dwelling units is valid and controls density compliance, and (2) a land use hearing examiner lacks jurisdiction to adjudicate fee-title ownership disputes—a permit applicant that submits a statutory warranty deed and title insurance satisfies its ownership obligation even if a challenger asserts a competing historical claim to a portion of the property.
The Washington Court of Appeals, Division I, reversed dismissal of a negligence claim against a 911 dispatch agency, holding that the complaint sufficiently alleged the special relationship exception to the public duty doctrine where a dispatcher took a call about an identified murder victim in an identified room, told the caller help was dispatched, and then placed the call on hold—but affirmed dismissal of the negligent supervision claim because the complaint did not allege that any dispatcher acted outside the scope of employment.
The Washington Court of Appeals, Division I, reversed a hearing examiner’s dismissal of SEPA appeals challenging the adequacy of the FEIS for Seattle’s “One Seattle Plan,” holding that state housing reform appeal prohibition statutes (RCW 36.70A.600(3) and RCW 36.70A.680(3)) bar challenges to adopted housing-increasing planning actions but do not bar pre-decisional administrative appeals of FEIS adequacy under SEPA before the City Council votes on the underlying plan.