age claim (Washington) · Go Syfert
← Washington issues

age claim in Washington

7 Washington opinions name it 2 courts 1954–2021 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.

Followed or applied (3)

CaseFollowedCited
Washington State Legislature v. Stategreen
wash · 1999 · cited in 1 Washington opinions naming this issue, 2021–2021
1 sentence

2021Locke, 139 Wn.2d at 147 (copayment provision in appropriations bill “add[ed] restrictions to public assistance eligibility”); Flanders, 88 Wn.2d at 185 (appropriations provision defined eligibility for services where it created an age requirement that did not exist in the codified welfare statute).

11
Flanders v. Morrisgreen
wash · 1977 · cited in 1 Washington opinions naming this issue, 2021–2021
1 sentence

2021Locke, 139 Wn.2d at 147 (copayment provision in appropriations bill “add[ed] restrictions to public assistance eligibility”); Flanders, 88 Wn.2d at 185 (appropriations provision defined eligibility for services where it created an age requirement that did not exist in the codified welfare statute).

11
Robertson v. O'Neillgreen
wash · 1912 · cited in 1 Washington opinions naming this issue, 1954–1954
2 sentences

1954See Robertson v. O’Neill, 67 Wash. 121 , 120 Pac. 884 (1912); McAllister v. Chambers, 71 Wash. 521 , 129 Pac. 85 (1913); 9 A. L.

1954See Robertson v. O’Neill, 67 Wash. 121 , 120 Pac. 884 (1912); McAllister v. Chambers, 71 Wash. 521 , 129 Pac. 85 (1913); 9 A. L.

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Washington. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (6)

CaseCitedYears
State v. Hodgson green
washctapp · 1986
2 sentences

2007The court found this argument unpersuasive, reasoning that because RCW 26.04.010 "allows for marriage under the age of 17 when the age requirement `has been waived by a superior court judge . . . on a showing of necessity' . . . [N]onmarriage is not an element implicit in first degree statutory rape." Id. (emphasis added) (first alteration in original).

2007The court found this argument unpersuasive, reasoning that because RCW 26.04.010 “allows for marriage under the age of 17 when the age requirement ‘has been waived by a superior court judge ... on a showing of necessity’. . . , nonmarriage is not an element implicit in first degree statutory rape.” Id. (emphasis added) (first alteration in original).

31988–2007
Brundridge v. Fluor Federal Services, Inc. green
wash · 2008
1 sentence

2015Servs., Inc., 164 Wn.2d 432 , 191 P.3d 879 (2008). 7 “I’m not going to make any rulings at this point as to whether or not the door has been opened on the age claim.

12015–2015
Brundridge v. Fluor Federal Services, Inc. green
wash · 2008
1 sentence

2015Servs., Inc., 164 Wn.2d 432 , 191 P.3d 879 (2008). 7 “I’m not going to make any rulings at this point as to whether or not the door has been opened on the age claim.

12015–2015
State v. Scoby green
wash · 1991
1 sentence

1992In this case, the manner in which the trial court segregated attorney's fees incurred on the age claim from attorney's fees incurred on other claims was reasonable, Gaglidari v. Denny's Restaurants, Inc., 117 Wn.2d 426, 450 , 815 P.2d 1362 (1991), and there was no abuse of discretion.

11992–1992
Gaglidari v. Denny's Restaurants, Inc. green
wash · 1991
1 sentence

1992In this case, the manner in which the trial court segregated attorney's fees incurred on the age claim from attorney's fees incurred on other claims was reasonable, Gaglidari v. Denny's Restaurants, Inc., 117 Wn.2d 426, 450 , 815 P.2d 1362 (1991), and there was no abuse of discretion.

11992–1992
McAllister v. Chambers neutral
wash · 1913
2 sentences

1954See Robertson v. O’Neill, 67 Wash. 121 , 120 Pac. 884 (1912); McAllister v. Chambers, 71 Wash. 521 , 129 Pac. 85 (1913); 9 A. L.

1954See Robertson v. O’Neill, 67 Wash. 121 , 120 Pac. 884 (1912); McAllister v. Chambers, 71 Wash. 521 , 129 Pac. 85 (1913); 9 A. L.

11954–1954

Statutes the citing opinions construe

WA § Wash. Rev. Code § 26.04.010 (3)

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.

Where else courts name it

CA 32 (1943–2025) NY 19 (1902–2026) NJ 17 (1961–2025) IL 16 (1975–2026) TX 11 (1958–2020) MS 9 (1996–2019) WA 7 (1954–2021) PA 7 (1976–2020) KS 7 (1997–2021) IN 6 (1973–2026) MI 5 (1984–2023) NC 5 (1982–2022) UT 4 (1999–2020) OR 4 (1970–2016) CT 4 (1996–2025) FL 4 (1974–2018) MN 4 (1973–2017) LA 4 (1992–2016) AL 3 (1989–2011) GA 3 (2018–2023) OK 3 (1976–1997) NM 2 (1987–2019) RI 2 (1977–1998) HI 2 (1996–2010) AR 2 (1996–2003) MT 2 (1996–2022) OH 2 (2007–2019) NH 2 (2009–2018) IA 2 (1907–2017) TN 2 (1955–1997) MA 2 (1991–2020) ID 2 (1988–1990) ME 2 (2014–2025)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check