9 Washington opinions name it 2 courts 1985–2021 1 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 |
|---|---|---|
Tellevik v. Real Property Known as 31641green2 sentences2014Tellevik, 120 Wn.2d at 82-83 . 2014Ed. 2d 18 (1976); Tellevik, 120 Wn.2d at 82 . ¶45 In Loudermill , the United States Supreme Court balanced these factors to determine what process was due to two public employees who were terminated without a predeprivation hearing, but who had an opportunity for a full postdeprivation hearing under former Ohio Rev. | 2 | 3 |
Fuentes v. Shevingreen1 sentence2021Fuentes v. Shevin, 407 U.S. 67, 80-81 (1972). | 1 | 1 |
Zinermon v. Burchgreen2 sentences2021Zinermon v. Burch, 494 U.S. 113, 132 , 110 S. Ct. 975 , 108 L. 2021Zinermon v. Burch, 494 U.S. 113, 132 , 110 S. Ct. 975 , 108 L. | 1 | 1 |
Cleveland Board of Education v. Loudermillgreen2 sentences2014Loudermill, 470 U.S. at 542-43 ; Mathews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319, 335 , 96 S. Ct. 893 , 47 L. 2014Code Ann. § 124.34 gave the teacher a full postdeprivation hearing, the predeprivation hearing need not be elaborate or formal, as long as it provides the employee with “[t]he opportunity to present reasons, either in person or in writing, why proposed action should not be taken.” Loudermill, 470 U.S. at 546 . | 1 | 1 |
Pierce v. Lake Stevens School District No. 4green1 sentence2014Pierce, 84 Wn.2d at 775, 777 ; see former RCW 28A.67.070 (1973). | 1 | 1 |
Carey v. Piphusgreen2 sentences2014An issue exists as to the remedy available to Schlosser for the District’s failure to provide her with a predeprivation hearing, given the hearing examiner’s finding that if a predeprivation hearing had occurred, “it [is] highly improbable that there would have been any different result.” Clerk’s Papers at 12; see Carey v. Piphus, 435 U.S. 247, 260, 267 , 98 S. Ct. 1042 , 55 L. 2014An issue exists as to the remedy available to Schlosser for the District’s failure to provide her with a predeprivation hearing, given the hearing examiner’s finding that if a predeprivation hearing had occurred, “it [is] highly improbable that there would have been any different result.” Clerk’s Papers at 12; see Carey v. Piphus, 435 U.S. 247, 260, 267 , 98 S. Ct. 1042 , 55 L. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Washington. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Pearson v. Callahan
green
2 sentences2010Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S. 223 , 129 S. Ct. 808, 815-16 , 172 L. 2010Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S. 223 , 129 S. Ct. 808, 815-16 , 172 L. | 2 | 2010–2010 |
Tellevik v. Real Property Known as 31641 West Rutherford Street
green
2 sentences2000This court construed the forfeiture statute so as to entitle claimants “to a full adversarial hearing within 90 days if they contest the seizure” and placed the burden “upon the seizing agency to prove the real property is subject to seizure.” Tellevik II, 125 Wn.2d at 371 -72 (quoting Tellevik I, 120 Wn.2d at 86). 2000This court construed the forfeiture statute so as to entitle claimants "to a full adversarial hearing within 90 days if they contest the seizure" and placed the burden "upon the seizing agency to prove the real property is subject to seizure." Tellevik II, 125 Wash.2d at 371-72 , 884 P.2d 1319 (quoting Tellevik I, 120 Wash.2d at 86, 838 P.2d 111 ). | 2 | 2000–2000 |
Jones v. State
green
1 sentence2017In Jones, this court held that health inspectors could be liable under section 1983 for wrongfully fabricating evidence to suspend a pharmacist's license without a predeprivation hearing. 170 Wn.2d at 352 . | 1 | 2017–2017 |
Mathews v. Eldridge
green
2 sentences2014Loudermill, 470 U.S. at 542-43 ; Mathews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319, 335 , 96 S. Ct. 893 , 47 L. 2014Loudermill, 470 U.S. at 542-43 ; Mathews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319, 335 , 96 S. Ct. 893 , 47 L. | 1 | 2014–2014 |
Bullo v. City of Fife
green
1 sentence2014Ed. 2d 252 (1978); Bullo v. City of Fife, 50 Wn. | 1 | 2014–2014 |
Nguyen v. Department of Health
green
1 sentence2013Nguyen, 144 Wn.2d at 522-23 . -19- NO. 67749-7-I / 20 opportunity to be heard “‘at a meaningful time and in a meaningful manner.’”44 If justified by an emergency, this notice and hearing may occur after a summary action.45 But the emergency cannot be fabricated.46 Thus, Janaszak can establish a § 1983 claim by proving an investigator wrongfully fabricated an emergency and knew or reasonably should have known that this fabrication would cause the Commission to find an emergency and summarily restrict Janaszak’s dental license without a predeprivation hearing.47 Janaszak contends Miller-Smith ca | 1 | 2013–2013 |
Olympic Forest Products, Inc. v. Chaussee Corp.
green
2 sentences1985Olympic Forest Prods., Inc. v. Chaussee Corp., 82 Wn.2d 418 , 511 P.2d 1002 (1973). 1985Olympic Forest Prods., Inc. v. Chaussee Corp., 82 Wn.2d 418 , 511 P.2d 1002 (1973). | 1 | 1985–1985 |
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.