Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 850318.pdf
- Citation
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 850318.pdf
- Jurisdiction
- Washington (state)
- Source verification
- official_capture_completeness_unverified
- Original Source
- https://www.courts.wa.gov/opinions/pdf/850318.pdf ↗
Related Parts of This Source
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 850318.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 850318.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 850318.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 850318.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 850318.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 850318.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 850318.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 850318.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 850318.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 850318.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 850318.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 850318.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 850318.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 850318.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 850318.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 850318.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 850318.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 850318.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 850318.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 850318.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 850318.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 850318.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 850318.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 850318.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 850318.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 850318.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 850318.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 850318.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 850318.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 850318.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 850318.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 850318.pdf
Full Text
1,741 charsIn determining the plain meaning of a statute, we consider “the ordinary meaning of words, the basic rules of grammar, and the statutory context to conclude what the legislature has provided for in the statute and related statutes.” In re Forfeiture of One 1970 Chevrolet Chevelle, 166 Wn.2d 834, 839, 215 P.3d 166 (2009). In so doing, we “construe a statute ‘so that all the language used is given effect, with no portion rendered meaningless or superfluous.’” Seattle City Light v. Swanson, 193 Wn. App. 795, 810, 373 P.3d 342 (2016) (internal quotation marks omitted) (quoting Rapid Settlements, Ltd. v. Symetra Life Ins. Co., 134 Wn. App. 329, 332, 139 P.3d 411 (2006)). “Common sense informs our analysis, as we avoid absurd results in statutory interpretation.” State v. Alvarado, 164 Wn.2d 556, 562, 192 P.3d 345 (2008). Linville v. Dep’t of Ret. Sys., 11 Wn. App. 2d 316, 321, 452 P.3d 1269 (2019). 6 A superior court commissioner’s interpretation of a statute involves a question of law which we review de novo. See Faciszewski v. Brown, 187 Wn.2d 308, 313-14, 386 P.3d 711 (2016) (citing King County v. Cent. Puget Sound Growth Mgmt. Hr’gs Bd., 142 Wn.2d 543, 555, 14 P.3d 133 (2000)); Dep’t of Ecology v. Campbell & Gwinn, LLC, 146 Wn.2d 1, 9, 43 P.3d 4 (2002) (citing State v. Breazeale, 144 Wn.2d 829, 837, 31 P.3d 1155 (2001); State v. J.M., 144 Wn.2d 472, 480, 28 P.3d 720 (2001)). 5 For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/. No. 85031-8-I/6 “[I]f, after this inquiry, the statute remains susceptible to more than one reasonable meaning, the statute is ambiguous and it is appropriate to resort to aids to construction, including legislative history.” Dep’t of Ecology, 146 Wn.2d at