Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 1012055.pdf

Related Parts of This Source

1,778 chars

them. Based on the facts and allegations in the record at this stage, summary

judgment was proper as to the RLTA claims. We affirm the trial court on this issue.

CONCLUSION

We reverse in part, affirm in part, and remand to superior court for further

proceedings. The attorney general is authorized to bring this action under RCW

45
For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.
State v. City of Sunnyside et al.
No. 101205-5

43.10.030(1) because this case involves matters of public concern in which the State

has an interest. We therefore reverse because the respondents are not entitled to

summary judgment on the basis of the attorney general’s authority. Nor are the

respondents entitled to summary judgment based on qualified immunity, municipal

liability, the availability of injunctive relief, or the prima facie challenge to the

housing discrimination claims. We therefore largely reverse. However, on this

record, no facts indicate the RLTA applies to the respondents, so summary judgment

was proper for the RLTA claims; we therefore affirm in part.

______________________________

WE CONCUR:

___________________________ ______________________________

46
For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.

State v. City of Sunnyside et al.

No. 101205-5

MADSEN, J. (concurring)—While I agree entirely with the lead opinion based on

the law, I write separately to emphasize that the procedural posture of this case does not

invite us to opine on the merits of the underlying action, and I do not join the lead