|
9:00 A.M.
|
Olympia
|
Wednesday, January 19, 2005
|
Case No. 1 – 74971-0
|
COUNSEL
|
Garth Kightlinger, Gary Scarbrough, Sid Sutherland, and Mark Williams,
v.
Public Utility District No. 1 of Clark County
|
Ben Shafton
Donald Cohen
Joan Foley
|
SYNOPSIS: Do taxpayers have standing to challenge Clark PUD’s authority to repair appliances that it does not sell or lease, and, if so, does Clark PUD have authority to repair such appliances?
|
Case No. 2 – 75024-6
|
COUNSEL
|
Kenneth McClarty,
v.
Totem Electric Company, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 76
|
Daniel Johnson
Anne-Marie Sargent
William Jeffery
Elisabeth Kranz
|
SYNOPSIS: What does the word “disability” mean in employment discrimination cases?
|
1:30 P.M.
Case No. 3 – 75096-3
|
COUNSEL
|
LRS Electric Controls, Inc., a Washington corporation; Tyko Mechanical, LLC, an Idaho Limited Liability Company,
And
Public Hospital District No. 1 of Pend Oreille County,
v.
Hamre Construction, Inc., a Washington corporation,
And
First National Insurance Company of America
|
Teresa Sherman
Scott Smith
Dianne Rudman
|
SYNOPSIS: Whether the pre-claim notice requirements in RCW 39.08.065 (contractor’s bond) and RCW 60.28.015 (retained percentage) apply to a second-tier subcontractor providing both materials and labor.
|
Case No. 4 – 75153-6
|
COUNSEL
|
Sergio Alvarez,
v.
John Banach and Jane Doe Banach, and their marital community
|
Raymond Bishop
Kathleen Thompson
|
SYNOPSIS: Whether a declaration of delivery without further proof that a request for a trial de novo has been served strictly complies with the requirements under 7.1(a) of the Mandatory Arbitration Rules.
|
These summaries are not formulated by the Court and are provided for the convenience of the public only.
|
