Matthew W. Hill

This case involved Margaret Lundeen's claim for death benefits under Washington's Industrial Insurance Act after her husband was killed at work when his truck was struck by a crashing U.S. Navy jet at McChord Air Force Base. Lundeen had settled a separate claim against the United States for $98,816 under the Military Claims Act, after which the Department of Labor and Industries denied her industrial insurance benefits on the ground that the settlement constituted a third-party recovery exceeding the statutory benefits under RCW 51.24.010. The trial court ruled in her favor, holding that the Military Claims Act settlement was not a third-party recovery, did not involve negligence, and did not impair the department's subrogation rights. On appeal, the court reversed, determining that the settlement qualified as a recovery from a third party under the Industrial Insurance Act and that no additional benefits were due because the amount recovered far exceeded the act's entitlements.

labor & employmentfederal powertorts & liability

This case involved King County attempting to collect additional 1961 personal property taxes from four corporations operating restaurants on leased premises, based on approximately $375,000 spent on leasehold improvements such as alterations and additions. The corporations sought and obtained an injunction against the county treasurer's sale of their personal property to satisfy these taxes, arguing the improvements were real property rather than taxable personal property. The trial court granted the injunction on the ground that the improvements were part of the realty, and the Supreme Court affirmed the result while providing a more detailed analysis of Washington tax law. The court reasoned that statutes classifying leaseholds as personal property applied only to leaseholds on publicly owned, tax-exempt land to enable collection of otherwise uncollectible real property taxes; on privately owned land, real property is taxed as a unit to the fee owner, and leaseholds are not separately assessed. The county's statute of limitations defense was deemed waived for failure to plead it affirmatively.

taxespropertyprocedure

This case involved property owners in Washington's Garden Springs area whose domestic wells went dry or had reduced water levels after the state excavated a highway cut for an interstate freeway. The state had constructed an impermeable clay dike at significant cost to prevent drainage of the underground water basin, but the effort failed due to unexpected porous or fractured basalt rock allowing water to escape beneath the dike, and the excavation also interfered with recharge. The trial court dismissed the action and held the state not liable for the loss. The Supreme Court affirmed, reasoning that percolating groundwater is subject to rules of reasonable use by landowners rather than strict liability or condemnation principles, and the state's actions qualified as reasonable use of its property without creating liability for the resulting harm to the wells.

propertytorts & liability

The case involved an appeal from a conviction under Washington's Uniform Narcotic Drug Act, where the defendant argued that the trial court erred by denying her challenge for cause to a prospective juror who had attended part of her preliminary hearing. The Supreme Court reversed, holding that the juror's presence at the preliminary hearing required disqualification due to a conclusive presumption of prejudice. The reasoning emphasized that sworn testimony at such hearings is broader than at trial and more likely to create lasting impressions than media accounts, and the juror's statements showed he would require the defense to expend a peremptory challenge to remove him. The court noted a split in authority but adopted the view that actual bias need not be shown when the situation arises infrequently and carries high risk of prejudice.

criminal lawprocedure

The case involved an appeal by opponents of a proposed highway route challenging the Washington State Highway Commission's adoption of a plan for State Route 12 in Walla Walla County following a public hearing. The superior court affirmed the commission's decision after reviewing only the existing administrative record and declining to admit additional evidence. The Supreme Court affirmed, ruling that under the Administrative Procedure Act and RCW 47.52.195, judicial review is limited to the record unless procedural irregularities are alleged, and that the commission's findings were not clearly erroneous or arbitrary and capricious under the applicable standards.

procedure

This case involved a car accident at an intersection in Tacoma where plaintiff Henry Poston, driving eastbound, stopped at a stop sign and flashing red light before attempting a left turn, only to be struck by defendant Thomas Mathers' westbound vehicle, which failed to stop despite the controls. Poston and his family sued for injuries, and the trial court directed a verdict finding Mathers negligent while submitting the question of Poston's contributory negligence to the jury, which denied recovery to the adult plaintiffs but awarded the minor child $500. On appeal, the Washington Supreme Court reversed the judgment as to the parents, holding that the jury instructions failed to adequately explain the drivers' respective duties, including that the primary duty to avoid collision rests on the disfavored driver (Mathers) and that a favored driver on an arterial is entitled to rely on the right-of-way while exercising ordinary care. The court reasoned that without proper instructions on Mathers' breached duty, the jury could not rationally evaluate whether Poston's actions constituted contributory negligence.

torts & liability