Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
14 Washington opinions name it 2 courts 1934–2025 3 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Washington courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Connecticut v. Doehrgreen2 sentences2002The statute required only “ ‘verification by oath of the plaintiff or of some competent affiant, that there is probable cause to sustain the validity of the plaintiff’s claims.’ ” Doehr, 501 U.S. at 5 (quoting Conn. Gen. 2002Doehr, 501 U.S. at 18 . | 1 | 2 |
Stewart Title Guaranty Co. v. Sterling Savings Bankgreen1 sentence2025See Stewart Title, 178 Wn.2d at 567 . 11 No. 86651-6-I/12 require Pula to comply with the bond requirement.” But the court’s order applied to Pula, not GTH. | 1 | 1 |
Cosmopolitan Engineering Group, Inc. v. Ondeo Degremont, Inc.green1 sentence2022See Cosmopolitan Eng’g Grp., 159 Wn.2d at 300 (“[A]n action against the bond must also necessarily claim that a contractor breached a contract or failed to pay.”). | 1 | 1 |
Cedar-Al Products, Inc. v. Chamberlaingreen1 sentence2021App. 763, 765 , 748 P.2d 235 (1987) (“Arguably, because the bond requirement is mandatory, no damages may be awarded for wrongfully obtaining an injunction if a bond does not exist.”). | 1 | 1 |
J.B. v. Department of Social & Health Servicesgreen1 sentence2017See K.J.B., 187 Wn.2d at 601 . | 1 | 1 |
In re the Detention of M.W.green1 sentence2017See M.W., 185 Wn.2d at 648 . | 1 | 1 |
Estate of Treadwell Ex Rel. Neil v. Wrightgreen2 sentences2004Neil v. Wright, 115 Wash.App. 238 , 61 P.3d 1214 *437 (2003), and In re Guardianship of Karan, 110 Wash.App. 76 , 38 P.3d 396 (2002), concluded that compliance with the bond requirement in the guardianship statute is a condition precedent for a guardian to have authority to act. 2004As we said in Treadwell, "[b]efore a guardianship is effective, and before guardianship letters are issued, adequate bond must be in place." Treadwell, 115 Wash.App. at 248 , 61 P.3d 1214 . | 1 | 1 |
Davis Oil Company v. William P. Mills, Iii, William P. Mills, III v. Davis Oil Companygreen1 sentence2002Wyatt v. Cole, 994 F.2d 1113, 1117 (1993); Davis Oil Co. v. Mills, 873 F.2d 774, 779 (5th Cir.1989). [12] Four concurring Justices in Doehr concluded that a bond requirement would not have cured the constitutional deficiencies of Connecticut's prejudgment statute. | 1 | 1 |
Howard L. Wyatt v. Bill Cole, John Robbins, IIgreen1 sentence2002Wyatt v. Cole, 994 F.2d 1113, 1117 (1993); Davis Oil Co. v. Mills, 873 F.2d 774, 779 (5th Cir.1989). [12] Four concurring Justices in Doehr concluded that a bond requirement would not have cured the constitutional deficiencies of Connecticut's prejudgment statute. | 1 | 1 |
Venegas v. United Farm Workers Uniongreen1 sentence1987See Venegas v. United Farm Workers Union, 15 Wn. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Washington. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
In Re Guardianship of Karan
green
2 sentences2004Neil v. Wright, 115 Wash.App. 238 , 61 P.3d 1214 *437 (2003), and In re Guardianship of Karan, 110 Wash.App. 76 , 38 P.3d 396 (2002), concluded that compliance with the bond requirement in the guardianship statute is a condition precedent for a guardian to have authority to act. 2004App. 76 , 38 P.3d 396 (2002), concluded that compliance with the bond requirement in the guardianship statute is a condition precedent for a guardian to have authority to act. | 2 | 2004–2004 |
Estate of Treadwell v. Wright
green
2 sentences2004Neil v. Wright, 115 Wash.App. 238 , 61 P.3d 1214 *437 (2003), and In re Guardianship of Karan, 110 Wash.App. 76 , 38 P.3d 396 (2002), concluded that compliance with the bond requirement in the guardianship statute is a condition precedent for a guardian to have authority to act. 2004As we said in Treadwell, “[bjefore a guardianship is effective, and before guardianship letters are issued, adequate bond must be in place.” Treadwell, 115 Wn. | 2 | 2004–2004 |
Fisher v. Parkview Properties, Inc.
green
1 sentence2021“The underlying public policy ‘is to encourage ready access to courts for good faith claims.’” Fisher v. Parkview Props., Inc., 71 Wn. | 1 | 2021–2021 |
Carrara, LLC v. Ron & E Enterprises, Inc.
green
1 sentence2020Bays argues that under RAP 2.4(b), Foley’s timely appeal of the trial court’s amended order on fees did not bring up the order of dismissal as an “otherwise appealable order.” Bays relies on Carrara, LLC v. Ron & E Enterprises, Inc., which similarly involved an appeal of an order granting attorney fees and costs. 137 Wn. | 1 | 2020–2020 |
Keck v. Collins
green
1 sentence2016CR 56(c); Keck, 184 Wn.2d at 370 . | 1 | 2016–2016 |
Janssen v. Topliff
green
1 sentence2004Neil v. Wright, 115 Wash.App. 238 , 61 P.3d 1214 *437 (2003), and In re Guardianship of Karan, 110 Wash.App. 76 , 38 P.3d 396 (2002), concluded that compliance with the bond requirement in the guardianship statute is a condition precedent for a guardian to have authority to act. | 1 | 2004–2004 |
Keene v. Edie
green
1 sentence2002Doehr, 501 U.S. 1, 23 , 111 S.Ct. 2105 , 115 L.Ed.2d 1 (1991) (White, J., concurring). [13] Kronenberg also claims that the attachment was lawful, citing Keene v. Edie, 131 Wash.2d 822, 834-35 , 935 P.2d 588 (1997). | 1 | 2002–2002 |
Keene v. Edie
green
1 sentence2002Doehr, 501 U.S. 1, 23 , 111 S.Ct. 2105 , 115 L.Ed.2d 1 (1991) (White, J., concurring). [13] Kronenberg also claims that the attachment was lawful, citing Keene v. Edie, 131 Wash.2d 822, 834-35 , 935 P.2d 588 (1997). | 1 | 2002–2002 |
Horace Butler v. James Aiken, Warden, Central Correctional Institute Travis Medlock, Attorney General, State of South Carolina
green
1 sentence1989Rejecting this argument, and the reasoning of the Seventh Circuit in Espinoza, the court stated, "[w]e are not persuaded, however, by the Seventh Circuit's dramatic extension of Edwards." Butler v. Aiken, 846 F.2d at 258 . | 1 | 1989–1989 |
In Re Utility Local Imp. Dist.
neutral
2 sentences1982We have decided with regard to RCW 57.16.090 that the bond provision "relates to the individual property owners making objection to the assessment against their specific property." In re ULID 1 v. Water Dist. 2, 53 Wn.2d 270, 275 , 333 P.2d 670 (1958). 1982We have decided with regard to RCW 57.16.090 that the bond provision "relates to the individual property owners making objection to the assessment against their specific property." In re ULID 1 v. Water Dist. 2, 53 Wn.2d 270, 275 , 333 P.2d 670 (1958). | 1 | 1982–1982 |
In re Platteville Foundry & Machine Co.
neutral
1 sentence1934In re Platville Foundry & Machine Co., 147 Fed. 828 , also cited by appellants, does not lend support to appellants’ position. | 1 | 1934–1934 |
Lung v. Pacific Storage Warehouse
neutral
2 sentences1934Its mortgage was foreclosed and the proceeds of the sale credited on account of the bond and the claim filed for the remainder’.” Lung v. Pacific Storage Warehouse, 123 Wash. 628 , 212 Pac. 1081 , cited by appellants, is distinguishable on the facts from the case at bar. 1934Its mortgage was foreclosed and the proceeds of the sale credited on account of the bond and the claim filed for the remainder’.” Lung v. Pacific Storage Warehouse, 123 Wash. 628 , 212 Pac. 1081 , cited by appellants, is distinguishable on the facts from the case at bar. | 1 | 1934–1934 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.