Not a Lexis+ subscriber? Try it out for free.


LexisNexis HeadsUp For Washington State - Court Opinions For May 14, 2012


Monday, May 14, 2012

To view the full text of these opinions, please visit:
or Lexis subscribers may use the links below to access the cases on

Division One of the Court of Appeals filed 5 new published opinions on Monday, May 14, 2012:

1. Dress v. Dep’t of Corr.
No. 66262-7
(May 14, 2012)
2012 Wash. App. LEXIS 1128


Brief: The Department of Corrections (DOC) is not authorized to either correct or ignore a final judgment and sentence that may be erroneous. Rather, it may petition the Court of Appeals for review of an alleged error of law in a judgment and sentence within 90 days of having knowledge of the terms of such a sentence. In this case, the DOC never petitioned for review of what it characterizes as an error of law in the inmate’s final judgment and sentence and then refused to release her from confinement when the final judgment and sentence, with credit for time served, so required. The superior court properly granted the inmate’s petition for a writ of mandamus directing the DOC to release her.

2. Herrin v. O’Hern
No. 66195-7
(May 14, 2012)
2012 Wash. App. LEXIS 1134


Brief: In this quiet title action based on adverse possession, there is a genuine issue of material fact whether the former owners of the property revoked permissive use in 1993, 16 years before the plaintiffs filed the action. Thus, the case is remanded to determine whether the hostility element of adverse possession is satisfied.

3. Sauter v. Houston Cas. Co.
No. 66809-9
(May 14, 2012)
2012 Wash. App. LEXIS 1135


Brief: Where an insurance policy explicitly provides coverage for the personal liability of a corporate officer incurred for acts performed in his or her official capacity as such, the policy does not insure against losses incurred where the officer acts in his or her personal capacity. Moreover, a guaranty executed by a corporate officer that secures the indebtedness of the corporation is not executed in the officer’s official capacity. Such a circumstance would result in the corporation itself guaranteeing its own indebtedness, thus negating the very purpose of the guaranty.

4. Quedado v. Boeing Co.
No. 67030-1
(May 14, 2012)
2012 Wash. App. LEXIS 1133


Brief: The trial court properly granted summary dismissal of the employee’s action for wrongful demotion and breach of implied contract, arising from his demotion out of management for exerting influence to get two of his relatives hired, because the record discloses no evidence of an implied contract modifying the at-will employment relationship and no promises of specific treatment in specific situations.

5. Lopez-Vasquez v. Dep’t of Labor & Indus.
No. 66265-1
(May 14, 2012)
2012 Wash. App. LEXIS 1125


Brief: One is entitled to victim’s compensation for injuries sustained from a vehicular assault only if there is a conviction for that vehicular assault. The victim compensation statute sets forth specific exceptions to the requirement of a conviction of vehicular assault, none of which apply to the circumstances of this case, where the vehicular assault charge was dismissed as a result of a plea agreement.



Tell a Friend About Washington Heads Up -

Pass along this HeadsUp Alert to your colleagues. They can register online to receive the next headsup directly from LexisNexis.

To stop receiving this communication, use this link.

For questions or comments, please write: HeadsUp is brought to you by LexisNexis®





Privacy Copyright © 2006 LexisNexis®, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
LexisNexis, 9443 Springboro Pike, Miamisburg, Ohio 45342

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