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.
6 Washington opinions name it 2 courts 1984–2016 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 |
|---|---|---|
Judy Garland v. Marie Torregreen2 sentences2006In Senear v. Daily Journal-American, 97 Wn.2d 148 , 641 P.2d 1180 (1982), this court determined that reporters had a qualified common law privilege in civil litigation, but that the privilege could be defeated if the party seeking disclosure could show that the claim was meritorious, that the information being sought went “ ‘to the heart of the plaintiff’s claim,’ ” and that “a reasonable effort [had been] made to acquire the desired information by other means”; additionally, the court must find that the reporter “need[ed] to preserve confidentiality.” Id. at 155-56 (quoting Garland v. Torre, 2006In Senear v. Daily Journal-American, 97 Wash.2d 148 , 641 P.2d 1180 (1982), this court determined that reporters had a qualified common law privilege in civil litigation, but that the privilege could be defeated if the party seeking disclosure could show that the claim was meritorious, that the information being sought went "`to the heart of the plaintiff's claim,"' and that "a reasonable effort [had been] made to acquire the desired information by other means"; additionally, the court must find that the reporter "need[ed] to preserve confidentiality." Id. at 155-56 , 641 P.2d 1180 (quoting Ga | 2 | 2 |
Senear v. Daily Journal-Americangreen2 sentences2006In Senear v. Daily Journal-American, 97 Wn.2d 148 , 641 P.2d 1180 (1982), this court determined that reporters had a qualified common law privilege in civil litigation, but that the privilege could be defeated if the party seeking disclosure could show that the claim was meritorious, that the information being sought went “ ‘to the heart of the plaintiff’s claim,’ ” and that “a reasonable effort [had been] made to acquire the desired information by other means”; additionally, the court must find that the reporter “need[ed] to preserve confidentiality.” Id. at 155-56 (quoting Garland v. Torre, 2006In Senear v. Daily Journal-American, 97 Wn.2d 148 , 641 P.2d 1180 (1982), this court determined that reporters had a qualified common law privilege in civil litigation, but that the privilege could be defeated if the party seeking disclosure could show that the claim was meritorious, that the information being sought went “ ‘to the heart of the plaintiff’s claim,’ ” and that “a reasonable effort [had been] made to acquire the desired information by other means”; additionally, the court must find that the reporter “need[ed] to preserve confidentiality.” Id. at 155-56 (quoting Garland v. Torre, | 1 | 5 |
State v. Rinaldogreen2 sentences2016Two years later, in State v. Rinaldo, 102 Wn.2d 749, 755 , 689 P.2d 392 (1984), the Supreme Court extended the qualified common law privilege for journalists to criminal cases. ¶25 In 2007, the legislature codified this privilege in RCW 5.68.010. 2016Two years later, in State v. Rinaldo, 102 Wn.2d 749, 755 , 689 P.2d 392 (1984), the Supreme Court extended the qualified common law privilege for journalists to criminal cases. ¶25 In 2007, the legislature codified this privilege in RCW 5.68.010. | 1 | 4 |
Snedigar v. Hoddersongreen2 sentences2006Because the associational privilege is not absolute, a court faced with a discovery dispute must rely on a balancing test, “essentially requiring both a heightened degree of relevance to the subject matter of the suit and a showing by the party seeking discovery that it has made reasonable, unsuccessful attempts to obtain the information elsewhere.” Id. ¶16 The Court of Appeals considered alongside Wilkinson two decisions from this court that had “used an analysis similar to that described in Wilkinson to determine whether a reporter’s qualified common law privilege against compulsory disclosu 2006Because the associational privilege is not absolute, a court faced with a discovery dispute must rely on a balancing test, "essentially requiring both a heightened degree of relevance to the subject matter of the suit and a showing by the party seeking discovery that it has made reasonable, unsuccessful attempts to obtain the information elsewhere." Id. ¶ 16 The Court of Appeals considered alongside Wilkinson two decisions from this court that had "used an analysis similar to that described in Wilkinson to determine whether a reporter's qualified common law privilege against compulsory disclos | 1 | 2 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Washington. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Smith v. Missouri
green
2 sentences2006In Senear v. Daily Journal-American, 97 Wn.2d 148 , 641 P.2d 1180 (1982), this court determined that reporters had a qualified common law privilege in civil litigation, but that the privilege could be defeated if the party seeking disclosure could show that the claim was meritorious, that the information being sought went “ ‘to the heart of the plaintiff’s claim,’ ” and that “a reasonable effort [had been] made to acquire the desired information by other means”; additionally, the court must find that the reporter “need[ed] to preserve confidentiality.” Id. at 155-56 (quoting Garland v. Torre, 2006In Senear v. Daily Journal-American, 97 Wash.2d 148 , 641 P.2d 1180 (1982), this court determined that reporters had a qualified common law privilege in civil litigation, but that the privilege could be defeated if the party seeking disclosure could show that the claim was meritorious, that the information being sought went "`to the heart of the plaintiff's claim,"' and that "a reasonable effort [had been] made to acquire the desired information by other means"; additionally, the court must find that the reporter "need[ed] to preserve confidentiality." Id. at 155-56 , 641 P.2d 1180 (quoting Ga | 2 | 2006–2006 |
Wilkinson v. Federal Bureau of Investigation
green
2 sentences2006Because the associational privilege is not absolute, a court faced with a discovery dispute must rely on a balancing test, “essentially requiring both a heightened degree of relevance to the subject matter of the suit and a showing by the party seeking discovery that it has made reasonable, unsuccessful attempts to obtain the information elsewhere.” Id. ¶16 The Court of Appeals considered alongside Wilkinson two decisions from this court that had “used an analysis similar to that described in Wilkinson to determine whether a reporter’s qualified common law privilege against compulsory disclosu 2006Because the associational privilege is not absolute, a court faced with a discovery dispute must rely on a balancing test, "essentially requiring both a heightened degree of relevance to the subject matter of the suit and a showing by the party seeking discovery that it has made reasonable, unsuccessful attempts to obtain the information elsewhere." Id. ¶ 16 The Court of Appeals considered alongside Wilkinson two decisions from this court that had "used an analysis similar to that described in Wilkinson to determine whether a reporter's qualified common law privilege against compulsory disclos | 2 | 2006–2006 |
M. A. Owens Co. v. Gargill
green
2 sentences2006In Senear v. Daily Journal-American, 97 Wash.2d 148 , 641 P.2d 1180 (1982), this court determined that reporters had a qualified common law privilege in civil litigation, but that the privilege could be defeated if the party seeking disclosure could show that the claim was meritorious, that the information being sought went "`to the heart of the plaintiff's claim,"' and that "a reasonable effort [had been] made to acquire the desired information by other means"; additionally, the court must find that the reporter "need[ed] to preserve confidentiality." Id. at 155-56 , 641 P.2d 1180 (quoting Ga 2006In Senear v. Daily Journal-American, 97 Wash.2d 148 , 641 P.2d 1180 (1982), this court determined that reporters had a qualified common law privilege in civil litigation, but that the privilege could be defeated if the party seeking disclosure could show that the claim was meritorious, that the information being sought went "`to the heart of the plaintiff's claim,"' and that "a reasonable effort [had been] made to acquire the desired information by other means"; additionally, the court must find that the reporter "need[ed] to preserve confidentiality." Id. at 155-56 , 641 P.2d 1180 (quoting Ga | 1 | 2006–2006 |
Loving v. Virginia
green
2 sentences1988Rev. 177 (1979). 14 See, e.g., RCW 5.60.060(2) (attorney-client); RCW 5.60.060(5) (governmental information); RCW 5.60.060(1), 26.20.071, 26.21.170 (husband-wife); RCW 5.60.060(4) (physician-patient). 15 Senear v. Daily Journal-Am., 97 Wn.2d 148, 154 , 641 P.2d 1180 (1982) (recognizing a qualified common law privilege for journalists in civil actions). 16 Nixon , at 710. 17 See, e.g., Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1, 12 , 18 L. 1988Rev. 177 (1979). 14 See, e.g., RCW 5.60.060(2) (attorney-client); RCW 5.60.060(5) (governmental information); RCW 5.60.060(1), 26.20.071, 26.21.170 (husband-wife); RCW 5.60.060(4) (physician-patient). 15 Senear v. Daily Journal-Am., 97 Wn.2d 148, 154 , 641 P.2d 1180 (1982) (recognizing a qualified common law privilege for journalists in civil actions). 16 Nixon , at 710. 17 See, e.g., Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1, 12 , 18 L. | 1 | 1988–1988 |
State v. Rinaldo
green
2 sentences1984Judge Ringold dissented, finding a journalist has a qualified common law privilege in a criminal case and Rinaldo had made a sufficient showing to justify in camera review. 36 Wn. 1984Judge Ringold dissented, finding a journalist has a qualified common law privilege in a criminal case and Rinaldo had made a sufficient showing to justify in camera review. 36 Wn. | 1 | 1984–1984 |
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.