Adamson v. Port of Bellingham

Ninth Circuit

Adamson v. Port of Bellingham

923 F.3d 728

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

DecidedMay 14, 2019

DocketNo. 16-35314

StatusPublished

This text of 923 F.3d 728 (Adamson v. Port of Bellingham) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Adamson v. Port of Bellingham, 923 F.3d 728 (9th Cir. 2019).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

We certified two questions to the Washington State Supreme Court. Adamson v. Port of Bellingham , 899 F.3d 1047 (9th Cir. 2018). We said that if "the Washington State Supreme Court decides that a priority usage agreement does not absolve a landlord of liability as a possessor of property, we will affirm the district court." Id. at 1051.

The Washington State Supreme Court so decided. "The fact that AMHS was in berth and using the passenger ramp at the time of the incident does not affect the Port's liability as a landowner-lessor. We answer the first certified question in the affirmative." Adamson v. Port of Bellingham , 438 P.3d 522, 528 (Wash. 2019). Specifically, it held that "that a priority use provision, an affirmative obligation to maintain and repair, and the ability to lease the property to others together create sufficient control of the property such that a landowner who leases the property is held liable as a premises owner." Id. at 525.

We affirm the district court.

AFFIRMED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM:

We certified two questions to the Washington State Supreme Court. Adamson v. Port of Bellingham , 899 F.3d 1047 (9th Cir. 2018). We said that if "the Washington State Supreme Court decides that a priority usage agreement does not absolve a landlord of liability as a possessor of property, we will affirm the district court." Id. at 1051.

The Washington State Supreme Court so decided. "The fact that AMHS was in berth and using the passenger ramp at the time of the incident does not affect the Port's liability as a landowner-lessor. We answer the first certified question in the affirmative." Adamson v. Port of Bellingham , 438 P.3d 522, 528 (Wash. 2019). Specifically, it held that "that a priority use provision, an affirmative obligation to maintain and repair, and the ability to lease the property to others together create sufficient control of the property such that a landowner who leases the property is held liable as a premises owner." Id. at 525.

We affirm the district court.

AFFIRMED.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

923 F.3d 728, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/adamson-v-port-of-bellingham-ca9-2019.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack