Today at the Court
Oral arguments are scheduled today in four cases. (Docket schedule here, briefs for the cases here)
During the morning session (starting at 9:00 a.m.), the Court will hear:
In re Parentage of Frazier, No. 81043-5 This case is on appeal from Division One Court of Appeals, and originated in Snohomish County Superior Court. The question before the court is whether a stepparent qualifies as a common law de facto parent, with the accompanying rights and responsibilities.
The trial court ruled that the petitioner, a stepfather, could and did prove that he qualified as a de facto parent for his teenage stepdaughter, relying in part on precedent from In re Parentage of L.B. 155 Wash.2d 679 (2006), in which cohabiting lesbians who had parented since their child's birth were found to be de facto parents. Court of Appeals reversed, finding that stepparents have other statutory remedies and cannot claim de facto parent status based on the Parentage of L.B. decision.
Ames v. Wash. State Health Dep’t Med. Quality Assurance Comm’n, No. 80644-6. This case is on appeal from Division Three Court of Appeals, and originated from a Department of Health administrative hearing order, later upheld by the Benton County Superior Court. The question before the court is whether expert testimony is necessary in a disciplinary proceeding before the Medical Quality Assurance Commission when the commission panel is not comprised solely of licensed physicians.
The commission in question, comprised of a physician, a physician’s assistant and a member of the public, found the petitioner to have violated several laws by his use of a medical instrument to identify food allergies.
During the afternoon session (starting at 1:30 p.m.), the Court will hear:
Shafer v. Dep’t of Labor & Indus., No. 81049-4. This case is on appeal from Division One Court of Appeals, and originated from a decision by the Department of Labor and Industries to not re-open a disability claim from 2000. The Department's decision was upheld by the Board of Industrial Appeals and King County Superior Court, but reversed by the Court of Appeals. The question before the Court is whether an order closing an industrial insurance claim based on an independent medical examination must be communicated to the worker’s attending physician in order to trigger the time period for administratively appealing the order.
SEIU Healthcare 775NW v. Gregoire, No. 82551-3. This case originates from a writ of mandamus filed with the Supreme Court. The question before the court is whether the governor violated collective bargaining law by failing to include a request for funding for negotiated union contracts in her budget proposal. The petitioner wants the Court to order Governor Gregoire to withdraw her budget and submit a new one that includes a request for funds necessary to fulfill the negotiated contracts.
Check back at 2:15 today for a live blog of the oral arguments in the SEIU case.
