In In re Estate of Hambleton,  No. 89419-1 (consolidated with In re Estate of MacBride No. 89500-7),  the Washington State Supreme Court upheld the “Bracken fix,” a retroactive amendment of the 2005 Estate and Transfer Tax Act, Chapter 83.100 RCW.   (Prior to 2005, Washington did not have an independent estate tax and instead participated…

In Failla v. FixtureOne Corp.,  No. 89671-2, the  Washington Supreme Court adopted a broad interpretation of the Washington long-arm statute.  It concluded that the founder and CEO of a non-resident corporation, which had a single employee in Washington state, was subject to personal jurisdiction.   “We hold that employing a Washington resident to perform work…

In Cashmere Valley Bank v. WA Dept. of Revenue, No. 8937-5, the Washington Supreme Court interpreted the state tax deduction statute, RCW 82.04.4292 (1980). The statute, prior to being amended in 2012, provided that banks and financial institutions could deduct from their income “amounts derived from interest received on investments or loans primarily secured…

In Frias v.  Asset Foreclosure  Services, Inc., the Washington Supreme Court held that the state law does not recognize an independent cause of action for monetary damages based on alleged violations of the Deeds of Trust Act (DTA), Chapter 61.24 RCW, when no foreclosure sale has been completed.  However, under some circumstances DTA violations may…

In Waltson v. Boeing Co., a 5-4 majority of the Washington Supreme Court held that Boeing did not have actual knowledge in 1985 that asbestos exposure would cause certain injury and that its former employee was therefore only entitled to worker’s compensation payment for the cost of the mesothelioma that likely resulted from that exposure.  While evidence showed Boeing knew that asbestos caused cellular damage and posed a risk of mesothelioma, the Court held that awareness of risk was not sufficient to defeat an employer’s tort immunity under the worker’s compensation system.  Had Boeing known that asbestos would cause certain injury, the employee’s estate would have been able to put aside worker’s compensation to sue Boeing for torts related to his disease and death.
Continue Reading Seeking Absolutes in a World of Probabilities: Washington Supreme Court Finds Mesothelioma to be Risk of Asbestos Exposure Rather than a Certain Harm

In Anderson v. Dussault, the Washington Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals, which had affirmed dismissal of a 20-year old plaintiff’s breach of trust action against the trustee and her malpractice action against the attorney responsible for the trust accounting. A special needs trust had been set up for the plaintiff after she…

In Gray v. Suttell & Associates, the Washington Supreme Court answered the question certified by the District Court for the Eastern District of Washington, whether debt buyers who purchase defaulted consumer obligations can pursue, as plaintiffs, collections actions in Washington. If the debt buyer directly or indirectly solicits claims for collection, the debt buyer…

In today’s Johnston-Forbes v. Matsunaga decision, the Washington Supreme Court reiterated the rule that expert testimony is admissible if (1) the expert is qualified, (2) the expert relies on theories that are generally accepted in the scientific community, and (3) the testimony would be helpful to the trier of fact. The trial court has to…

Brooks v. BPM Senior Living Co.

Court of Appeals Case No.:  69332-8-I

Supreme Court Case No.:  90220-8

Issue(s):

  1. Whether an employer fulfills its duty to assist a disabled employee in seeking alternative employment in the company when the only ‘interaction’ with the employee is a single phrase in an e-mail stating the employer “would be

…

The Rules of Professional Conduct: A Basis For Civil Action Or Remedy?

The Washington Supreme Court’s recent decision in LK Operating, LLC v. The Collection Group, LLC calls into question the extent that a violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct (“RPCs”) may be used as a basis for civil action. Ultimately, the Washington Supreme Court affirmed the rescission of a contract based on a violation of RPC 1.8(a).

This case involved a joint venture transaction regarding a debt collection business. The parties to the joint venture included LK Operating, LLC (“LKO”) and The Collection Group, LLC (“TCG”). The members of LKO, Leslie Powers and Keith Therrien, are both Washington attorneys who worked for the same law firm (the “Law Firm”). One of the members of TCG, Brian Fair, initially asked Mr. Powers and Mr. Therrien if they, along with their Law Firm, would be interested in investing in TCG and operating a joint venture. The proposal involved each party to the joint venture contributing fifty percent of all required funds, Mr. Fair providing administrative and management services, and the Law Firm and Mr. Powers providing legal services.Continue Reading The Rules of Professional Conduct: A Basis for Civil Action or Remedy?

About the Notice of Appeal Blog

Learn More

Welcome to the Stoel Rives Appellate Law blog, dedicated to providing those in appellate law practices regular updates on significant decisions from courts of appeal within our regions of practice. It is our goal to build out this blog to be a handy resource for both keeping up to date on new decisions and quickly locating information about past decisions.