Sheffield v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.

231 P.3d 165, 168 Wash. 2d 1023
CourtWashington Supreme Court
DecidedMarch 31, 2010
Docket83871-2
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 231 P.3d 165 (Sheffield v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Washington Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Sheffield v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., 231 P.3d 165, 168 Wash. 2d 1023 (Wash. 2010).

Opinion

231 P.3d 165 (2010)
168 Wash.2d 1023

Melissa SHEFFIELD, Respondent,
v.
GOODYEAR TIRE & RUBBER CO. and Randy Reich, Petitioners.

No. 83871-2.

Supreme Court of Washington.

March 31, 2010.

ORDER

¶ 1 Department II of the Court, composed of Chief Justice Madsen and Justices Alexander, Chambers, Fairhurst and Stephens, considered at its March 30, 2010, 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. Respondent's answer and cross-petition for review is also denied. The Respondent's request for attorney fees is granted. The Respondent is awarded reasonable attorney fees and expenses pursuant to RAP 18.1(j). The amount of the attorney fees and expenses will be determined by the Supreme Court Clerk pursuant to RAP 18.1. Pursuant to RAP 18.1(d), Respondent should file *166 an affidavit with the Clerk of the Washington State Supreme Court.

For the Court

/s/ Madsen, C.J. CHIEF JUSTICE

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

Related

State v. Huwe
231 P.3d 165 (Washington Supreme Court, 2010)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
231 P.3d 165, 168 Wash. 2d 1023, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sheffield-v-goodyear-tire-rubber-co-wash-2010.