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.
8 Washington opinions name it 1 courts 1999–2006 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 |
|---|---|---|
In re the Disciplinary Proceeding Against Huddlestongreen2 sentences2006See Guarnero, 152 Wn.2d at 58 ; cf. In re Disciplinary Proceeding Against Huddleston, 137 Wn.2d 560, 568 , 974 P.2d 325 (1999) (“This court will not disturb a hearing examiner’s findings of fact if the findings are supported by a clear preponderance of the evidence.”). 2006See Guarnero, 152 Wn.2d at 58 ; cf. In re Disciplinary Proceeding Against Huddleston, 137 Wn.2d 560, 568 , 974 P.2d 325 (1999) (“This court will not disturb a hearing examiner’s findings of fact if the findings are supported by a clear preponderance of the evidence.”). | 2 | 6 |
In re the Disciplinary Proceeding Against Guarnerogreen2 sentences2006STANDARD OF REVIEW ¶73 Turning first to the standard for review, the majority states that this court will uphold the hearing officer’s findings of fact if those findings are supported by substantial evidence, relying on In re Disciplinary Proceeding Against Guarnero, 152 Wn.2d 51 , 93 P.3d 166 (2004), and ELC 11.12(b). 2006STANDARD OF REVIEW ¶73 Turning first to the standard for review, the majority states that this court will uphold the hearing officer’s findings of fact if those findings are supported by substantial evidence, relying on In re Disciplinary Proceeding Against Guarnero, 152 Wn.2d 51 , 93 P.3d 166 (2004), and ELC 11.12(b). | 2 | 2 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Washington. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
In Re Disciplinary Proceeding Against Felice
green
2 sentences1999In re Discipline of Felice, 112 Wn.2d 520, 525 , 772 P.2d 505 (1989). 1999In re Discipline of Felice, 112 Wn.2d 520, 525 , 772 P.2d 505 (1989). | 2 | 1999–1999 |
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.