Richard B. Sanders

The case involved D.F.F., who was involuntarily committed for psychiatric treatment under state law, with her proceedings automatically closed to the public under Mental Proceedings Rule 1.3. She appealed, arguing that the mandatory closure violated article I, section 10 of the Washington Constitution, which requires that justice be administered openly. The Supreme Court ruled that MPR 1.3 is unconstitutional, as it imposes blanket closure without satisfying the individualized findings and five-part test established in Seattle Times Co. v. Ishikawa for any exception to open proceedings. The court determined that D.F.F. had standing under article I, section 10 because the open administration of justice protects both public access and an individual's right to have proceedings open to scrutiny, including by family or others who might assist.

civil rightsprocedurehealthcare

The case involved wrongful death and survival claims brought by the estate and siblings of Tyler DeLeon, a child who died from neglect and abuse by his adoptive mother, against DSHS employees and medical providers who had treated him. The claims against the doctors and clinic alleged medical malpractice and failure to report suspected child abuse under RCW 26.44.030. The superior court granted partial summary judgment dismissing the wrongful death and survival actions because the siblings were not dependents of Tyler and dismissing the failure-to-report claim as precluded by the medical malpractice statute (chapter 7.70 RCW). The Washington Supreme Court affirmed the dismissals, holding that the medical malpractice framework subsumes any implied civil remedy for failure to report and that the siblings did not qualify as dependents under the wrongful death statutes.

torts & liabilityhealthcarefamily law

This case involved the estate and siblings of Tyler DeLeon suing the Washington Department of Social and Health Services, its employees, and medical providers after Tyler died from neglect and abuse by his adoptive mother despite multiple CPS referrals. The plaintiffs asserted wrongful death and survival claims along with medical malpractice and an implied civil action for failure to report suspected child abuse under RCW 26.44.030. The Supreme Court of Washington affirmed the superior court's partial summary judgments dismissing the wrongful death and survival actions because the siblings did not qualify as dependents under the relevant statutes, and it dismissed the implied reporting claim because chapter 7.70 RCW governs medical malpractice remedies. The core reasoning rested on statutory interpretation requiring real and substantial dependency for wrongful death beneficiaries and legislative intent that the malpractice statute subsumes separate causes of action for reporting failures.

torts & liabilityfamily lawhealthcare

In State v. Marohl, the defendant was charged with second or third degree assault after placing another man in a choke hold during an altercation at a casino bar, causing the victim to fall unconscious and injure his face and prosthetic arm upon hitting the floor. A jury acquitted on second degree assault but convicted on third degree assault under RCW 9A.36.031(1)(d), which requires causing bodily harm by means of a weapon or other instrument or thing likely to produce bodily harm. The Court of Appeals affirmed, but the Washington Supreme Court reversed, holding that insufficient evidence supported the conviction because a casino floor is not an "instrument or thing likely to produce bodily harm" under the statute. The court reasoned that the statute's plain language requires an object similar to a weapon, and passive objects like floors do not qualify when the contact is incidental to the act rather than an intended instrumentality.

criminal law

In State v. Marohl, the defendant was charged with third degree assault after placing the victim in a choke hold during an altercation at a bar, causing the victim to fall to the floor and sustain injuries including a broken prosthetic arm. The jury convicted him under RCW 9A.36.031(1)(d), which requires causing bodily harm by means of a weapon or other instrument or thing likely to produce bodily harm, but the Washington Supreme Court reversed the conviction. The court reasoned that the casino floor, as a passive object, did not qualify as an "instrument or thing likely to produce bodily harm" under the plain meaning of the statute, and neither the defendant's arm nor the floor could support the conviction.

criminal law

The case involved the estate of Edward Gregoire suing the City of Oak Harbor for negligence after Gregoire, who had been arrested on misdemeanor warrants and exhibited unstable and suicidal behavior in custody, hanged himself in a jail cell roughly half an hour after arrival. The trial court instructed the jury on assumption of risk and contributory negligence over the plaintiff's objections; the jury found the city negligent but determined its negligence was not the proximate cause of death, and the Court of Appeals affirmed. The Washington Supreme Court reversed, holding that because jailors owe a special duty of care to inmates, jury instructions on assumption of risk and contributory negligence are inappropriate in cases of inmate suicide.

torts & liabilitycriminal law