HeadsUp for Washington State: Court Opinions For Wednesday, Nov. 27, 2013

HeadsUp for Washington State: Court Opinions For Wednesday, Nov. 27, 2013


Wednesday, November 27, 2013

To view the full text of these opinions, please click here. Lexis subscribers may use the links below to access the cases on either lexis.com or LexisAdvance. 

The Supreme Court of Washington filed 4 new opinions on Wednesday, November 27, 2013: 

1. In re Custody of A.F.J.

No. 86188-9

(November 27, 2013)

2013 Wash. LEXIS 942 Lexis.com

2013 Wash. LEXIS 942 LexisAdvance 

Areas: DOMESTIC RELATIONS AND FAMILY LAW 

Brief: The primary question was whether de facto parent status could be established based partially on facts that arose during a foster placement. While in most circumstances a foster parent will not be able to meet the criteria set forth in In re Parentage of L.B., 155 Wn.2d 679 (2005), foster parent status is not, itself, an absolute bar to establishing de facto parentage. A court may consider facts that arise during a foster care placement. 

 

2. In re Custody of B.M.H.

No. 86895-6

(November 27, 2013)

2013 Wash. LEXIS 944 Lexis.com

2013 Wash. LEXIS 944 LexisAdvance 

Areas: DOMESTIC RELATIONS AND FAMILY LAW 

Brief: The child’s mother’s former boyfriend did not meet the high burden imposed on those seeking third party custody, however, he was entitled to maintain his de facto parentage action. The Court of Appeals correctly concluded that the holding in In re Parentage of MF., 168 Wn.2d 528 (2010), did not bar the former boyfriend from petitioning for de facto parentage The legislature inevitably did not contemplate every conceivable family constellation, and drawing an arbitrary categorical bar based on an individual's status as a stepparent or a former stepparent would preclude legitimate parent-child relationships from being adjudicated. Unlike the specific factual scenario in MF., the circumstances claimed by the former boyfriend have not been contemplated by the legislature and addressed in Washington's statutory scheme. 

 

3. International Marine Underwriters v. ABCD Marine, LLC

No. 87231-7

(November 27, 2013)

2013 Wash. LEXIS 941 Lexis.com

2013 Wash. LEXIS 941 LexisAdvance 

Areas: BUSINESS AND COMMERCIAL LAW

           PERSONAL INJURY AND INSURANCE LAW 

Brief: As a general partner, the purchaser of the comprehensive marine liability insurance policy for the general partnership did not qualify as a third party under the “insured contract” provision in accordance with Washington partnership law and was not entitled to coverage for bodily injuries he suffered while working as an independent contractor. 

 

4. State v. Ruem

No. 86214-1

(November 27, 2013)

2013 Wash. LEXIS 943 Lexis.com

2013 Wash. LEXIS 943 LexisAdvance 

Areas: CRIMINAL LAW

 Brief: The sheriff’s deputies unlawfully entered the defendant’s mobile home in an attempt to execute an arrest warrant for the defendant’s brother. The deputies lacked probable cause to believe the brother was present, and the defendant revoked his initial consent to the entry. Thus, the evidence recovered from the search of the home was illegally obtained and unlawfully admitted.

About HeadsUp: Tell a friend to register online to subscribe to receive issues of the HeadsUp for Washington. To opt-out, unsubscribe, or to stop receiving this communication, use this link. For questions or comments, please write: HeadsUp@lexisnexis.com. HeadsUp for Washington is brought to you by LexisNexis®, publisher of the Washington Official Reports.

For more information about LexisNexis products and solutions, connect with us through our corporate site.