based analysis in Washington

2013This is based on our rule that “[e]rroneous instructions given on behalf of the party in whose favor the verdict was returned are presumed prejudicial unless it affirmatively appears they were harmless.” State v. Rice, 102 Wn.2d 120, 123 , 683 P.2d 199 (1984). ¶8 In a separate line of cases, we have addressed errors in charging information that are first raised in appeal.

2013This is based on our rule that “[e]rroneous instructions given on behalf of the party in whose favor the verdict was returned are presumed prejudicial unless it affirmatively appears they were harmless.” State v. Rice, 102 Wn.2d 120, 123 , 683 P.2d 199 (1984). ¶8 In a separate line of cases, we have addressed errors in charging information that are first raised in appeal.

2003Pippins, 46 Wn.

2003Pippins, 46 Wash.App. at 808 , 732 P.2d 1005 .

1998The Court based its analysis in some measure on Proverbs 28:1: "The wicked flee when no man pursueth." In reaching its conclusion, the Court had to explain its earlier holding in United States v. Mendenhall, 446 U.S. 544, 554 , 100 S.Ct. 1870, 1877 , 64 L.Ed.2d 497 (1980), where the Court said: "[A] person has been `seized' within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment only if, in view of all the circumstances surrounding the incident, a reasonable person would have believed that he was not free to leave." Under the Mendenhall formulation, the test is objective, not subjective.

1998The Court based its analysis in some measure on Proverbs 28:1: "The wicked flee when no man pursueth." In reaching its conclusion, the Court had to explain its earlier holding in United States v. Mendenhall, 446 U.S. 544, 554 , 100 S.Ct. 1870, 1877 , 64 L.Ed.2d 497 (1980), where the Court said: "[A] person has been `seized' within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment only if, in view of all the circumstances surrounding the incident, a reasonable person would have believed that he was not free to leave." Under the Mendenhall formulation, the test is objective, not subjective.

2025App. 2d 657, 423 P.3d 861 (2018) (WUTC). 8 In WUTC, an electric 7 Respondents cite the same de novo standard of review based on the procedural posture, as CR 12(b)(6) motions to dismiss are reviewed de novo. 8 The court based its analysis on the Administrative Procedure Act’s (APA) exhaustion statute, RCW 34.05.554(1), rather than the LUPA exhaustion requirement.

2013Kjorsvik, 117 Wn.2d at 105-06 .

2008Nevertheless, the court went on to conclude that "it would shock the sensibilities *901 to hold that there was no remedy for such a wrong." Id. at 20 , 89 P. 172 .

2008Nevertheless, the court went on to conclude that "it would shock the sensibilities *901 to hold that there was no remedy for such a wrong." Id. at 20 , 89 P. 172 .

2008Gontmakher v. City of Bellevue, 120 Wash.App. 365, 372 , 85 P.3d 926 (2004).

2008Gontmakher v. City of Bellevue, 120 Wash.App. 365, 372 , 85 P.3d 926 (2004).