Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 1012055.pdf

Citation: Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 1012055.pdf
Jurisdiction: Washington (state)
Source verification: official_capture_completeness_unverified
Original Source: https://www.courts.wa.gov/opinions/pdf/1012055.pdf ↗

Related Parts of This Source

Full Text

1,783 chars

judgment once again. Their primary theory on this motion was that the State lacked

the statutory authority to pursue this matter in any court for the same reasons it

lacked standing in federal court. The defendants argued that the analyses for the

attorney general’s authority to pursue matters of public concern and the parens

patriae doctrine are effectively the same and, so, the federal court’s standing ruling

should have preclusive effect. They also argued the State could not provide

admissible evidence demonstrating violations of the law and alleged that three tenant

declarations contained hearsay the court should not consider. The defendants also

raised a variety of other arguments for dismissal of all the State’s claims, including

that the individual defendants were entitled to qualified immunity, the City was not

subject to liability under the RLTA or for any claims under § 1983, and the State

could not establish a prima facie case of housing discrimination or any basis for

injunctive relief.

The superior court granted summary judgment to the defendants. The court

did not specify the grounds for its decision but did indicate that it considered all of

14
For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.
State v. City of Sunnyside et al.
No. 101205-5

the declarations of the tenants, the landlord, and the State’s experts. 2 CP at 852-53.

The court denied the State’s motion for reconsideration.7

The State appealed, and we retained the case for hearing and decision.8

ANALYSIS

We review summary judgment rulings de novo, “engag[ing] in the same

inquiry as the superior court.” Davis v. Baugh Indus. Contractors, Inc., 159 Wn.2d

413, 416, 150 P.3d 545 (2007); Lakehaven Water & Sewer Dist. v. City of Federal