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.
7 Washington opinions name it 2 courts 1998–2019 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 |
|---|---|---|
| No positive-treatment citations attached to this issue in Washington. | ||
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Washington. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Brister v. Tacoma City Council
neutral
2 sentences2010Attorneys subject to disciplinary proceedings are "entitled to a hearing before a hearing officer who [is] not only fair, but appear[s] to be fair." In re Disciplinary Proceeding Against Haskell, 136 Wash.2d 300, 313-14 , 962 P.2d 813 (1998) (citing Brister v. Council of Tacoma, 27 Wash.App. 474 , 619 P.2d 982 (1980), review denied, 95 Wash.2d 1006 (1981)). 2010Attorneys subject to disciplinary proceedings are “entitled to a hearing before a hearing officer who [is] not only fair, but appear[s] to be fair.” In re Disciplinary Proceeding Against Haskell, 136 Wn.2d 300, 313-14 , 962 P.2d 813 (1998) (citing Brister v. Council of Tacoma, 27 Wn. | 3 | 1998–2010 |
In the Matter of Disciplinary Proceeding Against Haskell
green
2 sentences2010Attorneys subject to disciplinary proceedings are "entitled to a hearing before a hearing officer who [is] not only fair, but appear[s] to be fair." In re Disciplinary Proceeding Against Haskell, 136 Wash.2d 300, 313-14 , 962 P.2d 813 (1998) (citing Brister v. Council of Tacoma, 27 Wash.App. 474 , 619 P.2d 982 (1980), review denied, 95 Wash.2d 1006 (1981)). 2010Attorneys subject to disciplinary proceedings are “entitled to a hearing before a hearing officer who [is] not only fair, but appear[s] to be fair.” In re Disciplinary Proceeding Against Haskell, 136 Wn.2d 300, 313-14 , 962 P.2d 813 (1998) (citing Brister v. Council of Tacoma, 27 Wn. | 2 | 2010–2010 |
In re the Disciplinary Proceeding against Haskell
green
2 sentences2010Attorneys subject to disciplinary proceedings are "entitled to a hearing before a hearing officer who [is] not only fair, but appear[s] to be fair." In re Disciplinary Proceeding Against Haskell, 136 Wash.2d 300, 313-14 , 962 P.2d 813 (1998) (citing Brister v. Council of Tacoma, 27 Wash.App. 474 , 619 P.2d 982 (1980), review denied, 95 Wash.2d 1006 (1981)). 2010Attorneys subject to disciplinary proceedings are “entitled to a hearing before a hearing officer who [is] not only fair, but appear[s] to be fair.” In re Disciplinary Proceeding Against Haskell, 136 Wn.2d 300, 313-14 , 962 P.2d 813 (1998) (citing Brister v. Council of Tacoma, 27 Wn. | 2 | 2010–2010 |
In Re the Marriage of Sacco
green
2 sentences2009Sacco, 114 Wn.2d at 5 . ¶38 It is clear that the PCC anticipated and allowed water customers and potential water customers to challenge the reasonableness of preannexation requirements. 2009Sacco, 114 Wash.2d at 5 , 784 P.2d 1266 . ¶ 38 It is clear that the PCC anticipated and allowed water customers and potential water customers to challenge the reasonableness of pre-annexation requirements. | 2 | 2009–2009 |
Schnitzer W., LLC v. City of Puyallup, Mun. Corp.
green
1 sentence2019Before the council may “approve an ordinance giving effect to a rezone approved by the hearing examiner, it must first receive the decision on such application from the hearing examiner” after a “duly noticed open record public hearing.” PMC 20.90.025. 11 47900-1-II Because the Supreme Court has held that this case presents a rezone application made by the council itself, Schnitzer W., 190 Wn.2d at 580 , Puyallup was required to commence a hearing before the hearing examiner pursuant to chapter 2.54 PMC. | 1 | 2019–2019 |
HJS Development, Inc. v. Pierce County
green
1 sentence2010HJS Dev., Inc. v. Pierce County, 148 Wn.2d 451, 483-84 , 61 P.3d 1141 (2003). ¶18 The hearing examiner concluded that [t]he ability to evacuate the Ponderosa area in approximately 30 minutes during a wildfire event, such as the 1991 firestorm, is critical to public safety, considering the large number of homes and approved lots in the area, location of the community in an urban/wildland interface with a high wildfire hazard, the rate at which wildfire can spread in the area, and the lack of definitive evidence in the record that alternative strategies such as sheltering in place, or going to a | 1 | 2010–2010 |
City of University Place v. McGuire
green
1 sentence2010McGuire, 144 Wn.2d at 647 . ¶17 Again, our review is of the administrative record developed at the hearing before the hearing examiner. | 1 | 2010–2010 |
HJS Development, Inc. v. Pierce County
green
1 sentence2010HJS Dev., Inc. v. Pierce County, 148 Wn.2d 451, 483-84 , 61 P.3d 1141 (2003). ¶18 The hearing examiner concluded that [t]he ability to evacuate the Ponderosa area in approximately 30 minutes during a wildfire event, such as the 1991 firestorm, is critical to public safety, considering the large number of homes and approved lots in the area, location of the community in an urban/wildland interface with a high wildfire hazard, the rate at which wildfire can spread in the area, and the lack of definitive evidence in the record that alternative strategies such as sheltering in place, or going to a | 1 | 2010–2010 |
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.