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 canonical passages across 7 cases, quoted by 21 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side — they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Lightle v. Department of Labor & Industries.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Lightle v. Department of Labor & Industries Anchor | green | “we have held that a liberal construction of the act does not dispose of the requirement that a claimant must prove his claim by competent evidence.” | 3 |
| 2 | Zoff v. Department of Labor & Industries | green | “the decision of the department was prima facie correct, and the burden was upon the one attacking that decision to overcome the same by evidence.” | 3 |
| 3 | Arsnow v. Red Top Cab Co. | green | “moved by an uncontrollable impulse” | 3 |
| 4 | Hastings v. Department of Labor & Industries | green | “the first rule is that the decision of the department is prima facie correct and the burden of proof is upon the party attacking the decision.” | 3 |
| 5 | Guiles v. Department of Labor & Industries | green | “we are mindful of the rule that the burden rests on claimant to prove every element of his claim by a preponderance of the evidence.” | 3 |
| 6 | Kirk v. Department of Labor & Industries | green | “persons entitled to the benefits of the act should be favored by a liberal interpretation of its provisions, but for this very reason they should be held to strict proof of their title as beneficiaries.” | 3 |
| 7 | Department of Labor & Industries v. Rowley | green | “washington courts have required proof of facts by clear, cogent, and convincing evidence in over 30 different types of cases,” | 3 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment — for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.