Hamm v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 42 P.3d 1278 (Wash. 2002). · Go Syfert
Hamm v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 42 P.3d 1278 (Wash. 2002). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
“apparent authority exists where words or conduct by the principal are reasonably interpreted by a third party as conferring authority upon the agent.”
61 citation events (61 in the last 25 years) across 4 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: State v. Dalseg (washctapp, 2006-07-05)
Treatment trajectory · 2001 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2001 2013 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 12 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (quoted) State v. Dalseg (2×) also: Cited "see, e.g."
Wash. Ct. App. · 2006 · signal: see · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence high
apparent authority exists where words or conduct by the principal are reasonably interpreted by a third party as conferring authority upon the agent.
discussed Cited "see" Sullivan v. Ferguson
W.D. Wash. · 2022 · signal: see · confidence high
See State v. Bryant, 42 P.3d 1278 , 1284 (2002) (“County prosecutors 6 are invested by the State with a limited grant of power to represent the State of Washington to 7 enforce the laws of the State within each prosecutor’s county.”); State v. Knight, 904 P.2d 1159 , 8 1165 (Wash. 1995) (“[A] sheriff in Washington has jurisdiction to enforce state criminal law 9 anywhere within the boundaries of his or her county.”); Wash. Rev.
cited Cited "see" In re Dependency of A.M.-S.
Wash. · 2020 · signal: see · confidence high
See generally State v. Bryant, 146 Wn.2d 90, 93 , 42 P.3d 1278 (2002) (plurality opinion).
discussed Cited "see" State v. Unga (2×)
Wash. · 2008 · signal: see · confidence high
See generally State v. Bryant, 146 Wash.2d 90 , 42 P.3d 1278 (2002) (concerning whether immunity granted by prosecutor of one county binds a different county's prosecutor); see State v. Bryant, 97 Wash.App. 479, 484 , 983 P.2d 1181 (1999), review denied, 140 Wash.2d 1026 , 10 P.3d 406 (2000) (to compel an individual to give up his Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination, a prosecutor can offer a defendant immunity from prosecution); State v. Reed, 75 Wash.App. 742, 745 , 879 P.2d 1000 (1994) (the police do not have authority to make prosecutorial decisions, and the decision whethe…
discussed Cited "see" State v. Unga
Wash. · 2008 · signal: see · confidence high
See generally State v. Bryant, 146 Wn.2d 90 , 42 P.3d 1278 (2002) (concerning whether immunity granted by prosecutor of one county binds a different county’s prosecutor); see State v. Bryant, 97 Wn.
discussed Cited "see" State v. Yates (2×)
Wash. · 2007 · signal: see · confidence high
Kramarevcky, 122 Wn.2d at 743 ; Br. of Resp’t at 63-64; see State v. Bryant, 146 Wn.2d 90, 100-04, 110-12 , 42 P.3d 1278 (2002) (Chambers, J., majority; Owens, J., dissenting) (holding that one county’s prosecutor lacks actual or apparent authority to bind another county’s prosecutor to an immunity agreement with a witness).
discussed Cited "see" State v. Yates (2×)
Wash. · 2007 · signal: see · confidence high
Kramarevcky, 122 Wash.2d at 743 , 863 P.2d 535 ; Br. of Resp't at 63-64; see State v. Bryant, 146 Wash.2d 90, 100-04, 110-12 , 42 P.3d 1278 (2002) (Chambers, J., majority; Owens, J., dissenting) (holding that one county's prosecutor lacks actual or apparent authority to bind another county's prosecutor to an immunity agreement with a witness).
discussed Cited "see" State v. Dalseg
Wash. Ct. App. · 2006 · signal: see · confidence high
See State v. Bryant, 146 Wn.2d 90, 102 , 42 P.3d 1278 (2002) (“Apparent authority exists where words or conduct by the principal are reasonably interpreted by a third party as conferring authority upon the agent.” (citing Restatement (Third) of Agency § 2.03 (2000))).
cited Cited "see" State v. Israel
Wash. Ct. App. · 2002 · signal: see · confidence high
See State v. Bryant, 146 Wash.2d 90 , 42 P.3d 1278 (2002).
cited Cited "see" State v. King
Wash. Ct. App. · 2002 · signal: see · confidence high
See State v. Bryant, 146 Wn.2d 90 , 42 P.3d 1278 (2002).
cited Cited "see, e.g." State v. Sanchez
Wash. · 2002 · signal: see also · confidence low
See also, State v. Bryant, 42 P.3d 1278 (Wash. Apr. 4, 2002) (Alexander, J. concurring).
cited Cited "see, e.g." State v. Sanchez
Wash. · 2002 · signal: see also · confidence low
See also State v. Bryant, 146 Wn.2d 90 , 42 P.3d 1278 (2002) (Alexander, C.J., concurring).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Rebecca HAMM, Petitioner,
v.
STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, Respondent.
70204-7.
Washington Supreme Court.
Apr 2, 2002.
42 P.3d 1278

ORDER

Department II of the Court (Justice Owens did not sit, Justice Madsen sat in her place) considered this matter at its April 2, 2002, Motion Calendar, and unanimously agreed that the following order be entered.

IT IS ORDERED:

That the Petition for Review is granted and remanded to the Court of Appeals for reconsideration in light of Winters, 144 Wash.2d 869, 31 P.3d 1164 (2001).