In King County Public Hospital District No. 2 v. Wash. State Dep’t of Health, the Washington State Supreme Court recognized that administrative law judges have broad discretion to admit evidence in challenges to agency actions. Further, administrative law judges’ decisions on underlying agency actions are reviewed under the arbitrary and capricious standard, and the record supported the administrative law judge’s decision here that the Department of Health’s action was neither arbitrary nor capricious.
Washington Appellate Practice
Prosecutors May Consider the Strength of Evidence of Guilt in Deciding Whether to Seek the Death Penalty
By Hunter Ferguson on
Posted in Opinions, Washington Supreme Court
In State v. McEnroe, the Washington Supreme Court ruled that prosecutors are not prohibited by statute from considering the evidence of guilt in deciding whether to seek the death penalty. Prosecutors must consider mitigating factors, and they also have discretion to consider other factors, including the strength of the evidence. Such consideration, the Court explained, does not violate principles of equal protection so long as prosecutors make an individualized determination.
Continue Reading Prosecutors May Consider the Strength of Evidence of Guilt in Deciding Whether to Seek the Death Penalty
State v. Chen: The Ishikawa Factors Govern the Determination Whether Competency Evaluations Should Be Sealed
By Leonard Feldman on
Posted in Opinions, Washington Supreme Court
In State v. Chen, the Washington Supreme held that once a competency evaluation becomes a court record, it also becomes subject to the constitutional presumption of openness, which can be rebutted only when the trial court makes an individualized finding that the Ishikawa factors weigh in favor of sealing. The Court essentially balanced the…
Washington State Supreme Court – September 3, 2013 Conference
By Hunter Ferguson on
The Court granted review in three cases at its September 3 conference.
|
Case
|
Background |
Issues |
|
| Fergen v. Sestero 88819-1 Court of Appeals Opinion |
In this med mal case, the treating physician testified that he considered two different diagnoses before incorrectly diagnosing his patient as having a benign cyst. The patient had a malignant tumor and |
…
Brown, et al. v. MHN Government Services, Inc., et al., No. 87953-2 (Aug. 15, 2013) (en banc)
By J. Will Eidson on
Posted in Merits Cases, Opinions
Brown, et al. v. MHN Government Services, Inc., et al. Opinion – August 15, 2013
Validity of Arbitration Agreements
This case involved an agreement, labeled “Provider Services Task Order Agreement,” between two mental health professionals and their employer. The agreement contained, among other things, a “Mandatory Arbitration” provision and was governed by California law. After several years of working for MHN Government Services, Inc. (“MHN”), plaintiffs filed a complaint in Pierce County Superior Court alleging state law wage claims on behalf of themselves and a proposed class. In response, MHN filed a motion to compel arbitration and stay the proceedings. Plaintiffs, in response, moved to quash the demand for arbitration, claiming that that the following five provisions were unconscionable (1) the forum selection clause; (2) the contractual statute of limitations; (3) the arbitrator selection provision; (4) the fee-shifting provision; and (5) the punitive damages exclusion. The superior court denied the motion to compel arbitration. MHN appealed and the case was ultimately transferred to the Supreme Court, pursuant to RCW 2.06.030.Continue Reading Brown, et al. v. MHN Government Services, Inc., et al., No. 87953-2 (Aug. 15, 2013) (en banc)
August 5, 2013 Conference Rulings
By Hunter Ferguson on
In its August 5, 2013 conference, the Washington Supreme Court granted, continued, or deferred consideration of petitions for review in the following cases:
| Case & Background | Issue(s) | |
| State v. Boysen 88611-3 41875-4-II CONTINUED (Sept. 4, 2013 En Banc Conference) Petition for Review Boysen was convicted of drive-by shooting and second-degree assault after the driver of |
||
…
Notice of Appeal Announces New Format and Content
By Hunter Ferguson on
Posted in Masthead
After an extended hiatus, we are reviving the Notice of Appeal blog and shifting its focus. Previously, we attempted to analyze noteworthy decisions on a weekly basis as they were issued by the Washington Supreme Court and the Washington Court of Appeals. Moving forward Notice of Appeal will concentrate on the Washington Supreme Court’s docket,…
Special Department Conference – August 5, 2013 | Pending Petitions for Review
By Hunter Ferguson on
Posted in Petitions for Review
Table prepared by Hunter Ferguson, Brooke Sargeant and Markus Skeem.
| Case & Background | Issue(s) | |
| K.P. McNamara, NW, Inc. v. Dep’t of Ecology 88584-2 42668-4-II Environmental/Administrative Ecology cited KP McNamara, NW, Inc. for violations of the Hazardous Waste Management Act (HWMA), chapter 70.105 RCW, for failing to follow procedures when shipping materials that KP McNamara had |
||
…
Wash. S. Ct.: A Rural Public Hospital District May Not Operate Within the Boundaries of Another Rural Public Hospital District Without Permission
By Hunter Ferguson on
Posted in Washington Supreme Court
Authored by Marcus Skeem and Hunter Ferguson of Stoel Rives LLP
In Skagit County Pub. Hosp. Dist. No. 304 v. Skagit County Pub. Hosp. Dist. No. 1, the Washington Supreme Court addressed whether a rural Public Hospital District (PHD) may provide healthcare services within the boundaries of another rural PHD without the second district’s…