Supreme Court Issues
May Term 2010

• Attorney and Client—Compensation—Contingency Fees—Settlement of Action—Actual Settlement Amount—Interest—Prejudgment Interest—Tolling—Deposit of Claimed Amount With Court
• Aviation—Products Liability—Limitation of Actions—Aircraft-Related Injury or Loss—Federal Statute of Repose—Applicability—“Manufacturer of Aircraft”—Type Certificate Holder
• Building Regulations—Land Use Regulations—Judicial Review—Land Use Petition Act—Dismissal of Action—Voluntary Dismissal—Frivolous Appeal—What Constitutes
• Certiorari—Statutory Review—Actions Subject to Review—Interlocutory Ruling—Limited Jurisdiction Court—Error of Law
• Computers—Gambling—Internet Gambling—State Regulation—Validity—Commerce Clause
• Constitutional Law—Freedom of Speech—Expressive Conduct—What Constitutes—Horn Honking
• Controlled Substances—Forfeitures—Attorney Fees—Substantially Prevailing Claimants—What Constitutes
• Criminal Law—Arrest—Detention for Questioning—Validity—Early Morning Visit to Suspected Drug House
• Criminal Law—Arrest—Warrantless Arrest—Private Premises—Subsequent Confession—Exclusionary Rule—State Constitution
• Criminal Law—Criminal Mistreatment—Elements—Dependent Person—What Constitutes—Child—Physical Disability
• Criminal Law—Discovery—DNA Sample—Validity as Search or Seizure—Probable Cause—Necessity
• Criminal Law—Dismissal of Charge—Misconduct by State—Court Rule—Exclusive Remedy
• Criminal Law—Former Jeopardy—Multiple Convictions—Same Offense—Telephone Harassment and Intimidating a Witness
• Criminal Law—Former Jeopardy—Multiple Offenses—Merger—Juveniles—Act Constituting One Offense and Element of Another Offense—Assault and Robbery
• Criminal Law—Homicide—Vehicular Homicide—Punishment—Sentence—Previous DUI Offenses—Proof
• Criminal Law—Intimidating Public Servant—Elements—Threat—Attempt to Influence Behavior—Proof—Sufficiency
• Criminal Law—Plea of Guilty—Waiver of Rights—Former Jeopardy
• Criminal Law—Plea of Guilty—Withdrawal—Misadvice About Deportation Consequences
• Criminal Law—Punishment—Sentence—Conditions—Community Custody—Prohibitions—Possession or Use of Drug Paraphernalia—Preenforcement Challenge—Ripeness for Review—Vagueness
• Criminal Law—Punishment—Sentence—Criminal History—“Wash Out” of Convictions—“Wash Out” Period—Classification—Anticipatory Offenses
• Criminal Law—Punishment—Sentence—Criminal History—“Wash-Out” of Convictions—“Wash-Out” period—Class C Felony—Confinement for Probation Violation
• Criminal Law—Sexual Offenses—Sexual Misconduct with Minor—School Employee and Student—“Student”—Qualifying Age
• Criminal Law—Telephone Harassment—Elements—Intent to Harass, Intimidate, Torment, or Embarrass—Time Intent is Formed—Instructions—Sufficiency
• Criminal Law—Telephone Harassment—Lesser Included Offense—Instructions—Necessity—Attempted Witness Intimidation—Witness Tampering
• Criminal Law—Trial—Misconduct of Prosecutor—Examination—Argument—Appeal to Racial Prejudice
• Criminal Law—Trial—Misconduct of Prosecutor—Witness Credibility—Testimony Required by Plea Agreement—Evidence That Witness Agreed to Testify Truthfully
• Criminal Law—Trial—Presence of Defendant—Right to Be Present—Scope—Jury Voir Dire—Dismissal of Potential Jurors After Email Communication Between Court and Counsel
• Criminal Law—Weapon—Enhanced Punishment—Firearm—Deadly Weapon Finding—Reversal of Firearm Enhancement—Resentencing—Remedy
• Criminal Law—Witnesses—Child Witness—Competency—Determination—Procedure—Due Process
• Criminal Law—Witnesses—Competency—Juveniles—Burden of Proof
• Employment—Vicarious Liability—Scope of Employment—Employer’s Vehicle—Performing Duties—Injury to Unauthorized Passenger
• Evidence—Opinion Evidence—Expert Testimony—Scientific Evidence—Acceptance in Scientific Community—Causal Relationship
• Gambling—Statutory Prohibitions—Definitional Provisions—“Gambling”—“Bookmaking”—Internet Website Providing for Nonbinding Betting
• Medical Treatment—Hospitals—Certificate of Need—Ambulatory Surgical Facilities—Determination of Need—Department of Health Formula—Validity
• Mental Health—Involuntary Commitment—Sexually Violent Predators—Petition—Initial Evaluation—Polygraph Examination
• Mental Health—Involuntary Commitment—Sexually Violent Predators—Trial—Evidence—Potential Treatment Available
• Mental Health—Involuntary Commitment—Sexually Violent Predators—Trial—Discovery—State Expert Reports—Offenders Found Not to be Sexually Violent Predators
• Mental Health—Involuntary Commitment—Sexually Violent Predators—Trial—Evidence—Potential Treatment Available
• Negligence—Owner or Occupier of Land—Duty of Care—Injury on Land—Discoverability of Defect—Proof—Necessity—Res Ipsa Loquitur—Applicability
• Open Government—Public Disclosure—Financial Institutions—Protection of Nonpublic Information—Federal Statutes—Preemption of State Law
• Partnership—Limited Liability Company—Merger—Dissenting Member’s Interest—Tender of Payment—Timeliness
• Schools—Special Education—Funding—Sufficiency—Constitutional Sufficiency—Funding Sources—Basic Education Allocation
• Witness—Fact Witness—Nonparty Treating Physician—Ex Parte Contact by Defense Counsel—What Constitutes—Provision of Court Records and Attorney Notes Prior to Testifying

Attorney and Client—Compensation—Contingency Fees—Settlement of Action—Actual Settlement Amount—Interest—Prejudgment Interest—Tolling—Deposit of Claimed Amount With Court

Whether, in a dispute over attorney fees owed by a former client, the trial court erroneously awarded the former attorney prejudgment interest even though the former client had deposited the amount of claimed fees in the trial court registry, and whether on appeal the Court of Appeals erroneously altered the settlement amount on which the former attorney’s contingency fee was based.

No. 82950-1, Forbes (petitioner) v. Schultz (respondent). (6/29/10)

148 Wn. App. 273 (2009)

Aviation—Products Liability—Limitation of Actions—Aircraft-Related Injury or Loss—Federal Statute of Repose—Applicability—“Manufacturer of Aircraft”—Type Certificate Holder

Whether the current holder of a aircraft type certificate issued by the Federal Aviation Administration is a “manufacturer” of the aircraft under the federal General Aviation Revitalization Act of 1994, entitling the holder to assert the act’s statute of repose in defense to a product liability action.

No. 83030-4, Burton (respondent) v. Twin Commander Aircraft LLC (petitioner). (6/8/10)

148 Wn. App. 606 (2009)

Building Regulations—Land Use Regulations—Judicial Review—Land Use Petition Act—Dismissal of Action—Voluntary Dismissal—Frivolous Appeal—What Constitutes

Whether a land use petitioner acted frivolously when he appealed from the denial of his motion to vacate an order dismissing his petition, which had been entered on the motion of the respondent after the petitioner had voluntarily withdrawn his petition.

No. 83151-3, Spice (petitioner) v. Pierce County (respondent). (7/1/10)

149 Wn. App. 461 (2009)

Certiorari—Statutory Review—Actions Subject to Review—Interlocutory Ruling—Limited Jurisdiction Court—Error of Law

Whether a municipal court order suppressing evidence in a criminal prosecution may be reviewed by the superior court by writ of review under RCW 7.16.040.

No. 83277-3, City of Seattle (respondent) v. Jacob (petitioner) (see also Criminal Law—Dismissal of Charge—Misconduct by State—Court Rule—Exclusive Remedy). (6/10/10)

150 Wn. App. 213 (2009)

Computers—Gambling—Internet Gambling—State Regulation—Validity—Commerce Clause

Whether a 2006 amendment to RCW 9.46.240 that effectively banned Internet gambling in Washington violates the commerce clause of the United States Constitution.

No. 83040-1, Rousso (petitioner) v. State (respondent). (5/27/10)

149 Wn. App. 344 (2009)

Constitutional Law—Freedom of Speech—Expressive Conduct—What Constitutes—Horn Honking

Whether a Snohomish County ordinance that prohibits honking of a vehicle horn except for public safety purposes violates the constitutional right to freedom of speech.

No. 83343-5, State (respondent) v. Immelt (petitioner). (6/8/10)

150 Wn. App. 681 (2009)

Controlled Substances—Forfeitures—Attorney Fees—Substantially Prevailing Claimants—What Constitutes

Whether the claimant in an action to recover property seized in a controlled substances investigation “substantially prevailed,” and thus was entitled to an award of attorney fees, even though she recovered in value less than one-quarter of the assets she sought.

No. 82531-9, Guillen, City of Sunnyside (respondents) v. Contreras (petitioner). (5/13/10)

147 Wn. App. 326 (2008)

Criminal Law—Arrest—Detention for Questioning—Validity—Early Morning Visit to Suspected Drug House

Whether police lawfully stopped a motorist for investigation after observing him in the early morning briefly visit a house where police suspected drugs were being sold based on neighbor complaints.

No. 82852-1, State (respondent) v. Doughty (petitioner). (5/6/10)

148 Wn. App. 585 (2009)

Criminal Law—Arrest—Warrantless Arrest—Private Premises—Subsequent Confession—Exclusionary Rule—State Constitution

Whether under the Washington Constitution a criminal defendant’s confession, made at the police station after the defendant waived his right to remain silent, should have been suppressed because the defendant was arrested in his home on probable cause but without a warrant.

No. 82491-6, State (respondent) v. Eserjose (petitioner). (6/10/10)

Criminal Law—Criminal Mistreatment—Elements—Dependent Person—What Constitutes—Child—Physical Disability

Whether a child can be a “dependent person” within the meaning of the first degree criminal mistreatment statute, RCW 9A.42.020, and if so, whether the child in this case had a “physical disability,” and thus was a “dependent person,” because he was in a weakened state allegedly caused by the defendant’s neglect.

No. 83169-6, State (respondent) v. Mitchell (petitioner). (6/29/10)

149 Wn. App. 716 (2009)

Criminal Law—Discovery—DNA Sample—Validity as Search or Seizure—Probable Cause—Necessity

Whether a discovery order under CrR 4.7(b)(2)(vi) requiring a criminal defendant to supply a DNA sample had to meet constitutional requirements for the issuance of a warrant, and if so, whether those requirements were not met because the trial court failed to expressly find probable cause.

No. 83156-4, State (respondent) v. Garcia-Salgado (petitioner). (6/24/10)

149 Wn. App. 702 (2009)

Criminal Law—Dismissal of Charge—Misconduct by State—Court Rule—Exclusive Remedy

Whether the municipal court in a prosecution for driving under the influence properly suppressed breathalyzer test results as remedy for government misconduct under CrRLJ 8.3(b).

No. 83277-3, City of Seattle (respondent) v. Jacob (petitioner) (see also Certiorari—Statutory Review—Actions Subject to Review—Interlocutory Ruling—Limited Jurisdiction Court—Error of Law). (6/10/10)

150 Wn. App. 213 (2009)

Criminal Law—Former Jeopardy—Multiple Convictions—Same Offense—Telephone Harassment and Intimidating a Witness

Whether convictions for both telephone harassment and intimidating a witness based on the same telephone call violate double jeopardy principles.

No. 83172-6, State (respondent) v. Meneses (petitioner) (see also Criminal Law—Telephone Harassment—Elements—Intent to Harass, Intimidate, Torment, or Embarrass—Time Intent is Formed—Instructions—Sufficiency; Criminal Law—Telephone Harassment—Lesser Included Offense—Instructions—Necessity—Attempted Witness Intimidation—Witness Tampering). (6/22/10)

149 Wn. App. 707 (2009)

Criminal Law—Former Jeopardy—Multiple Offenses—Merger—Juveniles—Act Constituting One Offense and Element of Another Offense—Assault and Robbery

Whether a juvenile offender convicted of first degree robbery and first degree assault based on the same criminal act was properly punished for both crimes under double jeopardy principles in light of RCW 13.40.180, which provides that the sentence of a juvenile offender who commits an act that constitutes both one offense and an element of another offense may not exceed 150 percent of the sentence for the more serious offense.

No. 83299-4, State (respondent) v. S.S.Y. (petitioner). (5/20/10)

150 Wn. App. 325 (2009)

Criminal Law—Homicide—Vehicular Homicide—Punishment—Sentence—Previous DUI Offenses—Proof

Whether in a prosecution for vehicular homicide the State sufficiently proved prior DUI convictions for purposes of a sentence enhancement by providing a certified copy of the defendant’s driver’s license abstract, an uncertified copy of an online case history, and a copy of a district court docket, and if not, whether the State should be allowed to present additional evidence at resentencing.

No. 82868-7, In re Pers. Restraint of Adolph, Vincent R. Adolph (petitioner); State (respondent). (5/18/10)

Criminal Law—Intimidating Public Servant—Elements—Threat—Attempt to Influence Behavior—Proof—Sufficiency

Whether the defendant intended to influence an arresting officer’s actions, and therefore committed the crime of intimidating a public servant, when he made threatening remarks to the officer following his arrest.

No. 82855-5, State (respondent) v. Montano (petitioner). (6/8/10)

147 Wn. App. 543 (2008)

Criminal Law—Plea of Guilty—Waiver of Rights—Former Jeopardy

Whether the defendant waived his double jeopardy challenge to multiple convictions by pleading guilty to the crimes.

No. 82619-6, In re Pers. Restraint of Francis, Sean D. Francis (petitioner); State (respondent). (5/13/10)

Criminal Law—Plea of Guilty—Withdrawal—Misadvice About Deportation Consequences

Whether a non-citizen defendant who pleaded guilty to a criminal charge should be allowed to withdraw his plea because his attorney misadvised him about the potential deportation consequences of his conviction.

No. 82175-5, State (respondent) v. Sandoval (petitioner); In re Pers. Restraint of Sandoval, Valentin Sandoval (petitioner). (6/10/10)

Criminal Law—Punishment—Sentence—Conditions—Community Custody—Prohibitions—Possession or Use of Drug Paraphernalia—Preenforcement Challenge—Ripeness for Review—Vagueness

Whether offenders still in prison for drug offenses may challenge a community custody condition prohibiting possession of “hand held electronic scheduling and data storage devices,” and if so, whether the prohibition is unconstitutionally vague.

No. 82731-1, State (respondent) v. Eduardo Sanchez; Isidro Valencia Sanchez (petitioners). (5/11/10)

148 Wn. App. 302 (2009)

Criminal Law—Punishment—Sentence—Criminal History—“Wash Out” of Convictions—“Wash Out” Period—Classification—Anticipatory Offenses

Whether RCW 9.94A.525(4), which directs that prior anticipatory felonies be scored the same as completed felonies in calculating a defendant’s offender score, requires a prior conviction for attempted second degree assault, a class C felony, to be treated as a class B felony (the class of the completed crime) for purposes of determining whether the conviction “washed out” of the defendant’s criminal history.

No. 82995-1, State (respondent) v. Moeurn (petitioner). (7/1/10)

Criminal Law—Punishment—Sentence—Criminal History—“Wash-Out” of Convictions—“Wash-Out” period—Class C Felony—Confinement for Probation Violation

Whether confinement on a misdemeanor probation violation interrupts the five-year “wash-out” period on a prior class C felony conviction.

No. 83244-7, State (respondent) v. Ervin (petitioner). (6/29/10)

149 Wn. App. 561 (2009)

Criminal Law—Sexual Offenses—Sexual Misconduct with Minor—School Employee and Student—“Student”—Qualifying Age

Whether a high school employee who had sexual intercourse with an 18-year-old student committed the crime of sexual misconduct with a minor under RCW 9A.44.093(1)(b), which prohibits sexual intercourse between a school employee and a registered student at least 16 years old.

No. 82744-3, State (petitioner) v. Hirschfelder (respondent). (5/11/10)

148 Wn. App. 328 (2009)

Criminal Law—Telephone Harassment—Elements—Intent to Harass, Intimidate, Torment, or Embarrass—Time Intent is Formed—Instructions—Sufficiency

Whether in a prosecution for telephone harassment the trial court should have instructed the jury that intent to harass the victim must exist when the telephone call is initiated.

No. 83172-6, State (respondent) v. Meneses (see also Criminal Law—Former Jeopardy—Multiple Convictions—Same Offense—Telephone Harassment and Intimidating a Witness; Criminal Law—Telephone Harassment—Lesser Included Offense—Instructions—Necessity—Attempted Witness Intimidation—Witness Tampering). (6/22/10)

149 Wn. App. 707 (2009)

Criminal Law—Telephone Harassment—Lesser Included Offense—Instructions—Necessity—Attempted Witness Intimidation—Witness Tampering

Whether in a prosecution for telephone harassment the trial court should have instructed the jury on attempted intimidation of a witness and witness tampering as lesser included offenses.

No. 83172-6, State (respondent) v. Meneses (petitioner) (see also Criminal Law—Former Jeopardy—Multiple Convictions—Same Offense—Telephone Harassment and Intimidating a Witness; Criminal Law—Telephone Harassment—Elements—Intent to Harass, Intimidate, Torment, or Embarrass—Time Intent is Formed—Instructions—Sufficiency). (6/22/10)

149 Wn. App. 707 (2009)

Criminal Law—Trial—Misconduct of Prosecutor—Examination—Argument—Appeal to Racial Prejudice

Whether the prosecutor in a criminal trial committed reversible misconduct by asking an African-American witness about her interactions with “po-leese” and by asserting in closing argument that “black folk don’t testify against black folk.”

No. 82736-2, State (respondent) v. Monday (petitioner). (5/11/10)

Criminal Law—Trial—Misconduct of Prosecutor—Witness Credibility—Testimony Required by Plea Agreement—Evidence That Witness Agreed to Testify Truthfully

Whether the prosecutor in a criminal trial improperly vouched for a witness’s credibility when on direct examination the prosecutor elicited the fact that the witness had promised to testify truthfully as part of a plea agreement.

No. 83308-7, State (respondent) v. Ish (petitioner). (6/29/10)

150 Wn. App. 775 (2009) Published in Part

Criminal Law—Trial—Presence of Defendant—Right to Be Present—Scope—Jury Voir Dire—Dismissal of Potential Jurors After Email Communication Between Court and Counsel

Whether the trial court in a criminal prosecution violated the defendant’s constitutional right to be present when it dismissed some potential jurors outside the defendant’s presence after conferring with defense counsel and the State by email.

No. 82665-0, State (petitioner) v. Irby (respondent). (5/13/10)

Criminal Law—Weapon—Enhanced Punishment—Firearm—Deadly Weapon Finding—Reversal of Firearm Enhancement—Resentencing—Remedy

Whether after reversal of a firearm enhancement in light of State v. Recuenco, 163 Wn.2d 428, 180 P.3d 1276 (2008), the trial court can impose a deadly weapon enhancement even though the only weapon involved in the crime was a firearm. See RCW 9.94A.533(4).

No. 82699-4, State (respondent) v. Bainard (petitioner). ORAL ARGUMENT STRICKEN—CASE SETTLED

148 Wn. App. 93 (2009)

Criminal Law—Witnesses—Child Witness—Competency—Determination—Procedure—Due Process

Whether the trial court violated a criminal defendant’s due process rights at a hearing concerning the competency of a child witness by declining to require the child’s presence for questioning.

No. 83415-6, State (respondent) v. Brousseau (appellant). (5/18/10)

Criminal Law—Witnesses—Competency—Juveniles—Burden of Proof

Whether in a prosecution for third degree rape the burden of proving that the child victim was competent to testify rested on the State as the party that called the child as a witness.

No. 83177-7, State (petitioner) v. Webb (respondent). (6/22/10)

149 Wn. App. 912 (2009)

Employment—Vicarious Liability—Scope of Employment—Employer’s Vehicle—Performing Duties—Injury to Unauthorized Passenger

Whether the State may be vicariously liable for injuries sustained by an unauthorized passenger of a state-owned vehicle driven by a state employee while on state business.

No. 83428-8, Rahman (respondent) v. State (petitioner). (5/18/10)

150 Wn. App. 345 (2009)

Evidence—Opinion Evidence—Expert Testimony—Scientific Evidence—Acceptance in Scientific Community—Causal Relationship

Whether, pursuant to Fry v. United States, 293 F. 1013 (D.C. Cir. 1923), the trial court in a personal injury action properly excluded expert testimony that exposure to organic solvents during pregnancy can cause neuronal birth defects.

No. 82264-6, Anderson (appellant) v. Akzo Nobel Coatings, Inc. (respondent). (6/22/10)

Gambling—Statutory Prohibitions—Definitional Provisions—“Gambling”—“Bookmaking”—Internet Website Providing for Nonbinding Betting

Whether participants in an internet betting site, who are not obligated to pay off their losing bets but whose “honor ratings” are lowered when they refuse to pay, engage in unlawful “gambling” under the Washington gambling act, chapter 9.46 RCW, and whether the operator of the site engages in unlawful “bookmaking” even though it takes no position on the bets.

No. 82845-8, Internet Cmty. & Entm’t Corp., d/b/a Betcha.com (respondents) v. State (petitioners). (5/27/10)

148 Wn. App. 795 (2009)

Medical Treatment—Hospitals—Certificate of Need—Ambulatory Surgical Facilities—Determination of Need—Department of Health Formula—Validity

Whether the Department of Health employed a flawed methodology to determine the need for additional ambulatory surgical facilities in Bellevue by including surgical procedures exempt from the certificate of need requirement in calculating demand but excluding facilities where exempt procedures are performed in calculating existing capacity.

No. 82728-1, Overlake Hosp. Ass’n & Overlake Hosp. Med. Ctr., et al. (respondents) v. Dep’t of Health of the State of Wash., et al. (petitioners). (5/20/10)

148 Wn. App. 1 (2008)

Mental Health—Involuntary Commitment—Sexually Violent Predators—Petition—Initial Evaluation—Polygraph Examination

Whether under chapter 71.09 RCW a person alleged to be a sexually violent predator may be required to submit to a polygraph examination as part of his initial evaluation.

No. 82907-1, In re Det. of Hawkins, Jake Hawkins (petitioner); State (respondent). (5/6/10)

Mental Health—Involuntary Commitment—Sexually Violent Predators—Trial—Evidence—Potential Treatment Available

Whether at trial on a petition to commit a sex offender as a sexually violent predator the State may present evidence of the treatment available to the offender should he be committed.

No. 82568-8, In re Det. of West, Gale West (petitioner); State (respondent) (see also Mental Health—Involuntary Commitment—Sexually Violent Predators—Trial—Discovery—State Expert Reports—Offenders Found Not to be Sexually Violent Predators). (5/27/10)

Mental Health—Involuntary Commitment—Sexually Violent Predators—Trial—Discovery—State Expert Reports—Offenders Found Not to be Sexually Violent Predators

Whether a sex offender in a sexually violent predator proceeding is entitled to discovery of past reports by the State’s expert on offenders who the expert found not to be sexually violent predators.

No. 82568-8, In re Det. of West, Gale West (petitioner); State (respondent) (see also Mental Health—Involuntary Commitment—Sexually Violent Predators—Trial—Evidence—Potential Treatment Available). (5/27/10)

Mental Health—Involuntary Commitment—Sexually Violent Predators—Trial—Evidence—Potential Treatment Available

Whether at trial on a petition to commit a sex offender as a sexually violent predator the State may present evidence of the treatment available to the offender should he be committed.

No. 83023-1, In re Det. of Post; Charles W. Post (respondent); State (petitioner).

145 Wn. App. 728 (2008) (5/27/10)

Negligence—Owner or Occupier of Land—Duty of Care—Injury on Land—Discoverability of Defect—Proof—Necessity—Res Ipsa Loquitur—Applicability

Whether in a personal injury action against a landowner for injuries sustained in falling through a wooden dock, the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur applied to prove both that the dock was dangerously defective and that the landowners knew or should have known of the defect.

No. 83307-9, Curtis (petitioner) v. Lein (respondent). (7/1/10)

150 Wn. App. 96 (2009)

Open Government—Public Disclosure—Financial Institutions—Protection of Nonpublic Information—Federal Statutes—Preemption of State Law

Whether the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, 15 U.S.C. § 6801, prohibits the state Attorney General from disclosing under the state Public Records Act certain loan files acquired by the Attorney General in a civil action against a financial institution.

No. 82690-1, Ameriquest Mortgage Co. (respondent) v. Wash. State Office of the Att’y General (petitioner). (5/11/10)

148 Wn. App. 145 (2009)

Partnership—Limited Liability Company—Merger—Dissenting Member’s Interest—Tender of Payment—Timeliness

Whether a limited liability company that agreed to merge with another company violated the Washington Limited Liability Company Act by failing to tender payment for a dissenting member’s interest within 30 days after the member’s initial demand for payment.

No. 82687-1, Humphrey Indus., Ltd. (petitioner) v. Clay St. Assocs., LLC, et al. (respondents). (6/24/10)

Schools—Special Education—Funding—Sufficiency—Constitutional Sufficiency—Funding Sources—Basic Education Allocation

Whether Washington’s special education funding mechanisms unconstitutionally underfund special education, and whether basic education funds can be applied to meet the State’s obligation to fully fund special education.

No. 82961-6, Sch. Dists. Alliance for Adequate Funding of Spec. Educ. (petitioners) v. State (respondents). (6/22/10)

149 Wn. App. 241 (2009)

Witness—Fact Witness—Nonparty Treating Physician—Ex Parte Contact by Defense Counsel—What Constitutes—Provision of Court Records and Attorney Notes Prior to Testifying

Whether in a medical malpractice action defense counsel’s transmittal of court documents and attorney notes to the plaintiff’s nonparty treating physician prior to the physician’s testimony for the defense constituted improper ex parte contact.

No. 83038-0, Smith (petitioners) v. Orthopedics Int’l, Ltd., P.S. (respondents). (6/24/10)

149 Wn. App. 337 (2009)