Pierce County challenge in Washington

2017Thus, his interpretation may frustrate the IIA’s purpose of protecting an injured worker because inclusion of additional attorney fees and costs not linked to the specific recovery could reduce a worker’s potential recovery. ¶26 Finally, Nelson cites Hi-Way Fuel, 128 Wn.

2017In Davis v. Department of Labor & Industries, 71 Wn.

2011“A discretionary decision ‘is based on untenable grounds’ or made ‘for untenable reasons’ if it rests on facts unsupported in the record or was reached by applying the wrong legal standard.” State v. Quismundo, 164 Wn.2d 499, 504 , 192 P.3d 342 (2008) (emphasis omitted) (internal quotation marks omitted) (quoting State v. Rohrich, 149 Wn.2d 647, 654 , 71 P.3d 638 (2003)). ¶24 The Nurseries and Pierce County challenge all of the trial court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law in granting the motion for a new trial.

2011“A discretionary decision ‘is based on untenable grounds’ or made ‘for untenable reasons’ if it rests on facts unsupported in the record or was reached by applying the wrong legal standard.” State v. Quismundo, 164 Wn.2d 499, 504 , 192 P.3d 342 (2008) (emphasis omitted) (internal quotation marks omitted) (quoting State v. Rohrich, 149 Wn.2d 647, 654 , 71 P.3d 638 (2003)). ¶24 The Nurseries and Pierce County challenge all of the trial court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law in granting the motion for a new trial.

2011Regan argues that the trial court erred by (1) adopting the facts from our unpublished opinion, State v. Cruz, noted at 146 Wn.

2011“A discretionary decision ‘is based on untenable grounds’ or made ‘for untenable reasons’ if it rests on facts unsupported in the record or was reached by applying the wrong legal standard.” State v. Quismundo, 164 Wn.2d 499, 504 , 192 P.3d 342 (2008) (emphasis omitted) (internal quotation marks omitted) (quoting State v. Rohrich, 149 Wn.2d 647, 654 , 71 P.3d 638 (2003)). ¶24 The Nurseries and Pierce County challenge all of the trial court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law in granting the motion for a new trial.

2011“A discretionary decision ‘is based on untenable grounds’ or made ‘for untenable reasons’ if it rests on facts unsupported in the record or was reached by applying the wrong legal standard.” State v. Quismundo, 164 Wn.2d 499, 504 , 192 P.3d 342 (2008) (emphasis omitted) (internal quotation marks omitted) (quoting State v. Rohrich, 149 Wn.2d 647, 654 , 71 P.3d 638 (2003)). ¶24 The Nurseries and Pierce County challenge all of the trial court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law in granting the motion for a new trial.

2007The fire fighter's rule is nearly identical in nature, although it has a "separate history and theoretical basis." Ballou v. Nelson, 67 Wash. App. 67, 71 , 834 P.2d 97 (1992). [2] Pierce County also proffers an untenable argument that the county was the entity responsible for bringing Beaupre to the scene because it "hired him and provided him the means, authority and responsibility to be there and guide the pursuit." Appellant's Reply Br. at 11. [3] We grant Pierce County's motion to strike the discovery requests and answers that Beaupre attached to his motion on the merits at the Court of Ap

2007The fire fighter's rule is nearly identical in nature, although it has a "separate history and theoretical basis." Ballou v. Nelson, 67 Wash. App. 67, 71 , 834 P.2d 97 (1992). [2] Pierce County also proffers an untenable argument that the county was the entity responsible for bringing Beaupre to the scene because it "hired him and provided him the means, authority and responsibility to be there and guide the pursuit." Appellant's Reply Br. at 11. [3] We grant Pierce County's motion to strike the discovery requests and answers that Beaupre attached to his motion on the merits at the Court of Ap

1974In re Bellingham, 10 Wn.