Regelbrugge v. Snohomish Cnty.

Washington Supreme Court

Regelbrugge v. Snohomish Cnty.

439 P.3d 1068, 193 Wash. 2d 1009

Washington Supreme Court·Decided May 1, 2019·No. No. 96798-9·Published

Opinion

¶ 1 Department II of the Court, composed of Chief Justice Fairhurst and Justices Madsen, Stephens, González and Yu, considered at its April 30, 2019, Motion Calendar whether review should be granted pursuant to RAP 13.4(b) and unanimously agreed that the following order be entered.

¶ 2 IT IS ORDERED:

¶ 3 That the petition for review is denied. The motion to strike contained in the Respondent's answer to the petition for review is also denied.

For the Court

/s/ Fairhurst, CJ. CHIEF JUSTICE

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

¶ 1 Department II of the Court, composed of Chief Justice Fairhurst and Justices Madsen, Stephens, González and Yu, considered at its April 30, 2019, Motion Calendar whether review should be granted pursuant to RAP 13.4(b) and unanimously agreed that the following order be entered.

¶ 2 IT IS ORDERED:

¶ 3 That the petition for review is denied. The motion to strike contained in the Respondent's answer to the petition for review is also denied.

For the Court

/s/ Fairhurst, CJ. CHIEF JUSTICE

Regelbrugge v. Snohomish Cnty., 439 P.3d 1068, 193 Wash. 2d 1009 (Wash. 2019).

Pincite

439 P.3d 1068 (Regelbrugge v. Snohomish Cnty.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.