mere fact hearing (Washington) · Go Syfert
← Washington issues

mere fact hearing in Washington

7 Washington opinions name it 2 courts 1937–2023 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 (2)

CaseFollowedCited
Polygon Corp. v. City of Seattlegreen
wash · 1978 · cited in 3 Washington opinions naming this issue, 1983–2018
2 sentences

2018Hornbaker, 98 Wn.2d at 660 (citing Polygon Corp. v. City of Seattle, 90 Wn.2d 59, 67-68 , 578 P.2d 1309 (1978)).

2018Hornbaker, 98 Wn.2d at 660 (citing Polygon Corp. v. City of Seattle, 90 Wn.2d 59, 67-68 , 578 P.2d 1309 (1978)).

23
Jones v. City of Seattlegreen
wash · 2013 · cited in 1 Washington opinions naming this issue, 2014–2014
2 sentences

2014See Jones v. City of Seattle, 179 Wn.2d 322, 345 , 314 P.3d 380 (2014) (willfulness is not established by the mere fact of violation of a court order or discovery rule, "[sjomething more is needed.") However, the findings of substantial prejudice and consideration of lesser sanctions do not demonstrate that the court imposed default as a sanction following a "meaningful inquiry" into the effect of Northwest's conduct and whether any other sanction could compensate La Rosa.

2014See Jones v. City of Seattle, 179 Wn.2d 322, 345 , 314 P.3d 380 (2014) (willfulness is not established by the mere fact of violation of a court order or discovery rule, "[sjomething more is needed.") However, the findings of substantial prejudice and consideration of lesser sanctions do not demonstrate that the court imposed default as a sanction following a "meaningful inquiry" into the effect of Northwest's conduct and whether any other sanction could compensate La Rosa.

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 (4)

CaseCitedYears
Legacy Roofing, Inc. v. Department of Labor & Industries green
washctapp · 2005
2 sentences

2023Legacy argued that it was “impossible” to show effective enforcement of its safety program because the “Board assumed that the mere fact of the violation showed that Legacy’s program was not effective in practice.” Id. at 367 .

2023Three Tree’s strict liability argument is akin to the argument rejected in Legacy Roofing, namely that the Board had assumed “the mere fact of the violation showed that Legacy’s program was not effective in practice.” Legacy Roofing, 129 Wn.

12023–2023
Harris v. Hornbaker green
wash · 1983
1 sentence

2018Hornbaker, 98 Wn.2d at 660 (citing Polygon Corp. v. City of Seattle, 90 Wn.2d 59, 67-68 , 578 P.2d 1309 (1978)).

12018–2018
King Aircraft Sales, Inc. v. Lane green
washctapp · 1993
1 sentence

1996King Aircraft Sales, Inc. v. Lane, 68 Wn.

11996–1996
Gabrielsen v. City of Seattle neutral
wash · 1928
2 sentences

1937Gabrielsen v. Seattle, 150 Wash. 157 , 272 Pac. 723 , 63 A. L.

1937Gabrielsen v. Seattle, 150 Wash. 157 , 272 Pac. 723 , 63 A. L.

11937–1937

Where else courts name it

CA 39 (1895–2025) TX 36 (1928–2026) NY 33 (1879–2022) IN 27 (1896–2023) MS 23 (1888–2015) IL 21 (1900–2025) FL 16 (1986–2004) MI 15 (1980–2020) MO 12 (1893–2016) PA 12 (1918–2019) NJ 11 (1951–2021) NM 9 (1968–2022) CO 8 (1975–2024) WA 7 (1937–2023) AZ 6 (1922–2013) ID 6 (1954–2021) TN 6 (1907–2012) OH 6 (1901–2019) KS 5 (1897–2022) GA 5 (1901–2005) OR 5 (1953–1998) SD 4 (1958–1987) OK 4 (1934–1997) IA 4 (1927–1942) VT 3 (1985–1991) AL 3 (1934–1991) UT 3 (1954–1994) MT 3 (2020–2023) DC 3 (1987–2010) LA 3 (2010–2024) KY 3 (1931–2026) NC 2 (2022–2022) VA 2 (2003–2016) WV 2 (2006–2011) MN 2 (1999–2016) ME 2 (1978–1996) WI 2 (1923–2004) CT 2 (1935–2003)

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