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.
9 Washington opinions name it 3 courts 2001–2014 0 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 |
|---|---|---|
Murrell v. Union Pacific Railroadgreen2 sentences2011Murrell, 544 F.Supp.2d at 1150 (alteration in original); cf. Van Buren, 544 F.Supp.2d at 879 ( 49 U.S.C. § 20106 (b)(1)(B) did not save state law negligence claim based on defendant's violation of internal vegetation regulation, because the internal rule was not created pursuant to a federal regulation). 2011Murrell, 544 F.Supp.2d at 1150 (alteration in original); cf. Van Buren, 544 F.Supp.2d at 879 ( 49 U.S.C. § 20106 (b)(1)(B) did not save state law negligence claim based on defendant's violation of internal vegetation regulation, because the internal rule was not created pursuant to a federal regulation). | 2 | 2 |
National Labor Relations Board v. Washington Aluminum Co.green2 sentences2009See Wash. Aluminum, 370 U.S. at 16-17 , 82 S.Ct. 1099 (holding that the violation of a company rule does not grant the employer authority "to punish a man by discharging him for engaging in concerted activities"). 2009See Wash. Aluminum, 370 U.S. at 16-17 (holding that the violation of a company rule does not grant the employer authority “to punish a man by discharging him for engaging in concerted activities”). | 2 | 2 |
State v. Copelandgreen1 sentence2013Evidence that is admissible under Frve must still pass the two-part test under ER 702: (1) whether the witness is qualified as an expert and (2) whether the expert testimony is helpful to the trier of fact.9 State v. Copeland, 130 Wn.2d 244, 256, 922 (iv) Prior to the start of the test, the temperature of any liquid simulator solution utilized as an external standard, as measured by a thermometer approved of by the state toxicologist was thirty-four degrees centigrade plus or minus 0.3 degrees centigrade; (v) The internal standard test resulted in the message "verified"; (vi) The two breath sa | 1 | 1 |
Van Buren v. Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway Co.green1 sentence2011Id. at 1150 (alteration in original); cf. Van Buren, 544 F. Supp. 2d at 879 ( 49 U.S.C. § 20106 (b)(1)(B) did not save state law negligence claim based on defendant’s violation of internal vegetation regulation because the internal rule was not created pursuant to a federal regulation). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Washington. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Union Bank of California, N.A. v. Superior Court
green
2 sentences2014It covers documents related to a bank's internal inquiry or review of accounts at issue (see Cotton, 235 F. Supp. 2d at 811 ), communications between a bank and law enforcement agencies relating to transactions conducted by the person suspected of criminal activity (see Whitney. 306 F. Supp. 2d at 682-83 ), and internal forms used in a bank's process for detecting suspicious activity that must be reported (see Union Bank. 130 Cal. App. 4th at 395 ). 2014It covers documents related to a bank’s internal inquiry or review of accounts at issue (see Cotton, 235 F. Supp. 2d at 811 ), communications between a bank and law enforcement agencies relating to transactions conducted by the person suspected of criminal activity (see Whitney, 306 F. Supp. 2d at 682-83), and internal forms used in a bank’s process for detecting suspicious activity that must be reported (see Union Bank, 130 Cal. App. 4th at 395 ). ¶21 Against this background, the Nortons seek disclosure of documents relating to internal monitoring and investigations conducted by the bank to d | 2 | 2014–2014 |
Cotton v. PrivateBank and Trust Co.
green
2 sentences2014It covers documents related to a bank's internal inquiry or review of accounts at issue (see Cotton, 235 F. Supp. 2d at 811 ), communications between a bank and law enforcement agencies relating to transactions conducted by the person suspected of criminal activity (see Whitney. 306 F. Supp. 2d at 682-83 ), and internal forms used in a bank's process for detecting suspicious activity that must be reported (see Union Bank. 130 Cal. App. 4th at 395 ). 2014It covers documents related to a bank’s internal inquiry or review of accounts at issue (see Cotton, 235 F. Supp. 2d at 811 ), communications between a bank and law enforcement agencies relating to transactions conducted by the person suspected of criminal activity (see Whitney, 306 F. Supp. 2d at 682-83), and internal forms used in a bank’s process for detecting suspicious activity that must be reported (see Union Bank, 130 Cal. App. 4th at 395 ). ¶21 Against this background, the Nortons seek disclosure of documents relating to internal monitoring and investigations conducted by the bank to d | 2 | 2014–2014 |
Whitney National Bank v. Karam
green
1 sentence2014It covers documents related to a bank's internal inquiry or review of accounts at issue (see Cotton, 235 F. Supp. 2d at 811 ), communications between a bank and law enforcement agencies relating to transactions conducted by the person suspected of criminal activity (see Whitney. 306 F. Supp. 2d at 682-83 ), and internal forms used in a bank's process for detecting suspicious activity that must be reported (see Union Bank. 130 Cal. App. 4th at 395 ). | 1 | 2014–2014 |
WMCA, Inc. v. Lomenzo
green
2 sentences2001We view our task in this opinion, however, as one of providing you with our best analysis of the merits of the underlying principles; we offer no opinion as to whether a court would reach the merits in any particular case, given the prudential concerns that may arise in a specific lawsuit. 4 WMCA, Inc. v. Lomenzo , 377 U.S. 633 , 845 S.Ct. 1418 , 12 L.Ed.2d 568 (1964); Lucas v. Forty-Fourth Gen. 2001We view our task in this opinion, however, as one of providing you with our best analysis of the merits of the underlying principles; we offer no opinion as to whether a court would reach the merits in any particular case, given the prudential concerns that may arise in a specific lawsuit. 4 WMCA, Inc. v. Lomenzo , 377 U.S. 633 , 845 S.Ct. 1418 , 12 L.Ed.2d 568 (1964); Lucas v. Forty-Fourth Gen. | 1 | 2001–2001 |
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.