New cases accepted
The Supreme Court accepted several new cases for review during its December 1 conference.
- State v. S.S.Y., No. 83299-4
- Bowie v. Wash. Dep’t of Revenue, No. 83426-1
- Rahman v. State of Wash., No. 83428-8
- Puget Sound Energy, Inc. v. Lee, No. 83433-4
- Veit v. Burlington N. Santa Fe Corp., No. 83385-1
State v. S.S.Y., No. 83299-4. The Pierce County Juvenile Court convicted and sentenced juvenile defendant “S.S.Y.” to two full-term, consecutive sentences for first degree assault and first degree robbery. He had been charged with attacking another boy, causing blindness in one eye, stomping on the boy’s hand, and stealing the boy’s MP3 player. S.S.Y. appealed, arguing that the two offenses merged. The Court of Appeals (Div. 2) held that the juvenile’s dispositions for first degree assault and first degree robbery did not merge for double jeopardy purposes, and that the dispositions for assault and robbery did not constitute a single act, within meaning of statute limiting juvenile sentences for multiple crimes to 150% of the most serious offense.
Bowie v. Wash. Dep’t of Revenue, No. 83426-1. Richard and Annette Bowie, as franchisees of Valpak Direct Marketing Systems, Inc., create and distribute advertising coupon mailings to Washington residential addresses. The Department of Revenue (DOR) categorized this activity as “publishing” and taxed the Bowies under the business and occupations (B & O) tax rate applicable to persons engaged in the publishing business. The Bowies obtained refunds for overpaid taxes based on the DOR’s classification. The DOR later rescinded this classification as the printing and mailing is done by a third party. The trial court granted summary judgment to the DOR. On appeal the Court of Appeals (Div. 2) reversed and remanded for further proceedings.
Rahman v. State of Wash., No. 83428-8. Rizwana Rahman was injured while riding in a state vehicle as an unauthorized passenger. She had accompanied her husband, an intern with the Department of Ecology, on a trip to Spokane when he lost control of the vehicle and crashed. She filed suit against the State of Washington for damages associated with her injuries. The trial court dismissed her complaint. The Court of Appeals (Div. 2) reversed, holding that the State is vicariously liable for Mrs. Rahman’s injuries under the doctrine of respondeat superior, and remanded for further proceedings.
Puget Sound Energy, Inc. v. Lee, No. 83433-4. After a workers’ compensation claimant was awarded a pension for a permanent total disability, the employer, Puget Sound Energy, requested second injury fund relief. The Board of Industrial Insurance Appeals denied relief, and the Superior Court, King County, affirmed the Board decision. The Court of Appeals (Div. 1) held that employer was entitled to jury trial on whether claimant had a “previous bodily disability” at time he suffered disabling injury.
Veit v. Burlington N. Santa Fe Corp., No. 83385-1. Motorist Alizon Veit was seriously injured when a Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad freight train collided with her car at a railroad crossing in Bellingham. Veit sued, claiming the railroad engineer negligently operated the train at an unreasonable and excessive speed. The trial court dismissed Veit’s excessive speed claims and entered judgment on jury verdict in favor of railroad. The Court of Appeals (Div. 1) affirmed the trial court, holding that the Federal Railroad Safety Act preempted Veit’s excessive speed claim where the train was traveling at the speed limit prescribed under federal regulation at time of collision.
