Segura v. Cabrera, 184 Wash. 2d 587 (2015)
- Citation
- Segura v. Cabrera, 184 Wash. 2d 587 (2015)
- Parent Document
- Segura v. Cabrera, 184 Wash. 2d 587 (2015)
- Jurisdiction
- Washington (state)
- Effective Date
- 2015-10-29
Other Sections in This Document (60)
- Segura v. Cabrera, 184 Wash. 2d 587 (2015)
- Segura v. Cabrera, 184 Wash. 2d 587 (2015)
- Segura v. Cabrera, 184 Wash. 2d 587 (2015)
- Segura v. Cabrera, 184 Wash. 2d 587 (2015)
- Segura v. Cabrera, 184 Wash. 2d 587 (2015)
- Segura v. Cabrera, 184 Wash. 2d 587 (2015)
- Segura v. Cabrera, 184 Wash. 2d 587 (2015)
- Segura v. Cabrera, 184 Wash. 2d 587 (2015)
- Segura v. Cabrera, 184 Wash. 2d 587 (2015)
- Segura v. Cabrera, 184 Wash. 2d 587 (2015)
- Segura v. Cabrera, 184 Wash. 2d 587 (2015)
- Segura v. Cabrera, 184 Wash. 2d 587 (2015)
- Segura v. Cabrera, 184 Wash. 2d 587 (2015)
- Segura v. Cabrera, 184 Wash. 2d 587 (2015)
- Segura v. Cabrera, 184 Wash. 2d 587 (2015)
- Segura v. Cabrera, 184 Wash. 2d 587 (2015)
- Segura v. Cabrera, 184 Wash. 2d 587 (2015)
- Segura v. Cabrera, 184 Wash. 2d 587 (2015)
- Segura v. Cabrera, 184 Wash. 2d 587 (2015)
- Segura v. Cabrera, 184 Wash. 2d 587 (2015)
- Segura v. Cabrera, 184 Wash. 2d 587 (2015)
- Segura v. Cabrera, 184 Wash. 2d 587 (2015)
- Segura v. Cabrera, 184 Wash. 2d 587 (2015)
- Segura v. Cabrera, 184 Wash. 2d 587 (2015)
- Segura v. Cabrera, 184 Wash. 2d 587 (2015)
- Segura v. Cabrera, 184 Wash. 2d 587 (2015)
- Segura v. Cabrera, 184 Wash. 2d 587 (2015)
- Segura v. Cabrera, 184 Wash. 2d 587 (2015)
- Segura v. Cabrera, 184 Wash. 2d 587 (2015)
- Segura v. Cabrera, 184 Wash. 2d 587 (2015)
- Segura v. Cabrera, 184 Wash. 2d 587 (2015)
- Segura v. Cabrera, 184 Wash. 2d 587 (2015)
- Segura v. Cabrera, 184 Wash. 2d 587 (2015)
- Segura v. Cabrera, 184 Wash. 2d 587 (2015)
- Segura v. Cabrera, 184 Wash. 2d 587 (2015)
- Segura v. Cabrera, 184 Wash. 2d 587 (2015)
- Segura v. Cabrera, 184 Wash. 2d 587 (2015)
- Segura v. Cabrera, 184 Wash. 2d 587 (2015)
- Segura v. Cabrera, 184 Wash. 2d 587 (2015)
- Segura v. Cabrera, 184 Wash. 2d 587 (2015)
- Segura v. Cabrera, 184 Wash. 2d 587 (2015)
- Segura v. Cabrera, 184 Wash. 2d 587 (2015)
- Segura v. Cabrera, 184 Wash. 2d 587 (2015)
- Segura v. Cabrera, 184 Wash. 2d 587 (2015)
- Segura v. Cabrera, 184 Wash. 2d 587 (2015)
- Segura v. Cabrera, 184 Wash. 2d 587 (2015)
- Segura v. Cabrera, 184 Wash. 2d 587 (2015)
- Segura v. Cabrera, 184 Wash. 2d 587 (2015)
- Segura v. Cabrera, 184 Wash. 2d 587 (2015)
- Segura v. Cabrera, 184 Wash. 2d 587 (2015)
- Segura v. Cabrera, 184 Wash. 2d 587 (2015)
- Segura v. Cabrera, 184 Wash. 2d 587 (2015)
- Segura v. Cabrera, 184 Wash. 2d 587 (2015)
- Segura v. Cabrera, 184 Wash. 2d 587 (2015)
- Segura v. Cabrera, 184 Wash. 2d 587 (2015)
- Segura v. Cabrera, 184 Wash. 2d 587 (2015)
- Segura v. Cabrera, 184 Wash. 2d 587 (2015)
- Segura v. Cabrera, 184 Wash. 2d 587 (2015)
- Segura v. Cabrera, 184 Wash. 2d 587 (2015)
- Segura v. Cabrera, 184 Wash. 2d 587 (2015)
Full Text
1,720 chars¶16 Segura cites Rasor v. Retail Credit Co., 87 Wn.2d 516, 554 P.2d 1041 (1976), and Martini v. Boeing Co., 137 Wn.2d 357, 971 P.2d 45 (1999), for the proposition that actual damages includes damages for emotional distress. But Rasor concerned damages available under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), 15 U.S.C. §§ 1681-1681x, whose purpose is “ ‘to protect an individual from inaccurate or arbitrary information about himself in a consumer report that is being used as a factor in determining the individual’s eligibility for credit, insurance or employment.’ ” Rasor, 87 Wn.2d at 520 (quoting Porter v. Talbot Perkins Children’s Servs., 355 F. Supp. 174, 176 (S.D.N.Y. 1973)). Martini addressed claims of discrimination under Washington’s Law Against Discrimination (WLAD) (ch. 49.60 RCW). See Martini, 137 Wn.2d at 366-68. The purpose of WLAD is to protect the “public welfare, health, and peace of the people” because “discrimination threatens [their] rights and proper privileges.” RCW 49.60.010. Both the FCRA and WLAD guard against harm to the person. The inclusion of emotional distress damages in those cases is not surprising, as such provision comports with the purpose and protections afforded by the statutes in question. But no similar purpose is present in this case. Here, the text of the statute, as discussed above, attests that the legislature is concerned *595only with return of a tenant’s money and assisting the tenant in getting relocated, not in providing redress for a personal injury or protecting against harm to the person. There is no similarity to the types of situations presented in Rasor and Martini, which involved different statutes with different language and different purposes.