6 Washington opinions name it 1 courts 2017–2026 4 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 |
|---|---|---|
Gamboa v. Clarkgreen1 sentence2026See Gamboa, 183 Wn.2d at 45-46 . | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Washington. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Stuart Mccoll v. Geoffrey Anderson
green
2 sentences2025App. 2d 88, 92-93, 429 P.3d 1113 (2018). 2025App. 2d 88 , 92, 429 P.3d 1113 (2018) (same as to claims involving other interests); McCallum v. Smith, No. 86175-1-I, slip op. at 18 (Wash. Ct. App. Apr. 22, 2024) (unpublished), https://www.courts.wa.gov/opinions/pdf/861751.pdf.7 Here, as we explained above, we conclude Cunningham did not provide substantial evidence to support the sole claim they raised for which fees are authorized, namely, adverse possession. | 2 | 2025–2025 |
Union Bank, NA v. Vanderhoek Associates, LLC
green
1 sentence2021Relying on Union Bank, N.A. v. Vanderhoek Associates, LLC, 191 Wn. | 1 | 2021–2021 |
Crescent Harbor Water Co. v. Lyseng
green
1 sentence2018App. 337 , 339 n.3, 753 P.2d 555 (1988). 4 No. 50998-9-II Because a prescriptive easement claim does not actually assert title to property, RCW 7.28.083(3) does not apply to McColl’s prescriptive easement lawsuit.2 CONCLUSION We reverse the trial court’s award of attorney fees to Anderson under RCW 7.28.083(3) and vacate the attorney fee judgment. | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Cuillier v. Coffin
green
1 sentence2017Cuillier, 57 Wn.2d at 627 . | 1 | 2017–2017 |
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.