Tuesday, May 29, 2012
To view the full text of these opinions, please visit:http://email.lexisnexismail.com/cgi-bin8/DM/t/hpE10Ggrcd0FuK0lc40E8or Lexis subscribers may use the links below to access the cases on Lexis.com
Division One of the Court of Appeals filed 4 new published opinions on Tuesday, May 29, 2012:1. State v. Truong No. 67151-1 (May 29, 2012)2012 Wash. App. LEXIS 1226Areas: CRIMINAL LAWBrief: In this prosecution of a juvenile, evidence that the juvenile took the victim’s MP3 player and used force to overcome the victim’s efforts to resist the taking and that the juvenile assisted others in the robbery of the victim’s headphones is sufficient to support the juvenile’s first degree robbery adjudication. In addition, evidence that the juvenile and her accomplices searched through the second victim’s pockets, an accomplice removed the victim’s cigarettes, and the defendant and her accomplices punched the victims is sufficient to support the juvenile’s second degree robbery adjudication.2. State v. Martinez MoralesNo. 66239-2(May 29, 2012)2012 Wash. App. LEXISAreas: CRIMINAL LAWBrief: The trial court incorrectly calculated an offender score of eight for the defendant’s current conviction of felony driving under the influence (DUI). The offender score should be four because the score should include only the defendant’s current conviction of attempting to elude and his three most recent prior DUI convictions.3. Moore v. Commercial Aircraft Interior, LLC No. 66279-1 (May 29, 2012)2012 Wash. App. LEXIS 1228Areas: BUSINESS AND COMMERCIAL LAWEMPLOYMENT LAWPERSONAL INJURY AND INSURANCE LAWBrief: The trial court properly granted the former employer’s motion for summary judgment on the plaintiff’s claims that the employer tortiously interfered with the plaintiff’s expectation of employment with a competitor and blacklisted him.4. Greenbank Beach & Boat Club, Inc. v. BunneyNo. 66308-9 (May 29, 2012)2012 Wash. App. LEXIS 1224Areas: COURTSPROPERTY AND LAND USE LAWBrief: The defendants built a home that exceeded the height limitation of a restrictive covenant. In a suit brought by the homeowners associations, the trial court ordered the house to be modified. The court also awarded attorney fees, concluding that appellants acted in bad faith when they knowingly built a nonconforming home. The Court of Appeals affirms the judgment ordering the house to be modified, but reverses the award of attorney fees. Prelitigation bad faith is not available as an equitable basis for an award of attorney fees where the actions found to be taken in bad faith did not pose a threat to the authority of the court.
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@lexisnexis.com 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.