Cases

FILED United States Court of Appeals PUBLISH Tenth Circuit UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS March 5, 2020 Christopher M. Wolpert FOR THE TEN

WALTERS, Chief Judge. This is an appeal from an order of the district court upholding a decision of the Department of Health and Welfare requiring John Madsen to contribute financially to the cost of care provided by the Department to him in his home. We affirm. John Madsen was approved for participation in a personal care service offered through the Home and Community Based Services Program of the state Dep

C. Johnson, J. ¶1 This case asks us to determine whether RCW 4.84.350, which provides a statutory cap on attorney fees, establishes a limit for each level of judicial review of an agency action or on all levels of review combined. Consistent with the purpose of the equal access to justice act (EAJA), RCW 4.84.340, .350, and .360, we hold that the statute provides a cap on attorney fees for each level of judicial review and rever

BORDEN, J., with whom VERTEFEUILLE, J., joins, dissenting. The majority concludes that sexual orientation is a quasi-suspect class under our state constitutional provisions guaranteeing equal protection of the laws; Conn. Const., § 20, art. I, §§ 1 and 20;1 and, based on that conclusion, the majority further concludes that our statute confining marriage

Owens, J. The representative class plaintiff, Danny Keffeler, argues that the State violated the equal protection clause of the fourteenth amendment to the United States Constitution by misusing funds and refusing to exercise discretion in social security fund disbursement, causing foster children with the State as a representative payee to be treated differently from children with a private representative payee. Keffeler further

Alexander, C.J. — The King County Superior Court entered an order holding that J.W.H., J.C.H., and S.E.H. are dependent children. The order was based on a finding that the aforementioned children had no parent, guardian, or custodian capable of adequately caring for them. The Court of Appeals, Division One, affirmed the dependency order. We conclude that the Court of Appeals erred in affirming the superior court’s depend

Chambers, J. ¶1 Washington enacted an unemployment compensation act during an earlier time of great economic insecurity and unemployment to “lighten its burden which now so often falls with crushing force upon the unemployed worker.” Laws of 1937, ch. 162, § 2. Since the beginning, the system focused on easing that burden on those of us who are involuntarily out of work. See generally id. ch. 162. But our legislature did

Sanders, J. The plaintiff class asks us to hold the Washington State Department of Social and Health Services (DSHS) violated that provision of the Social Security Act (the Act), 42 U.S.C. § 407(a) which forbids creditor access to Social Security benefits. Here DSHS acts as a representative payee under 42 U.S.C. § 405(j) for foster children and then applies the Social Security benefits to reimburse the state budget for payments mad

Madsen, J. — This case arises from a Child Protective Services (CPS) investigation into allegations of parental child abuse leveled against Petitioner David Tyner, the father of two minor children. Tyner filed suit against the Department of Social and Health Services (DSHS and State) claiming that a negligent CPS investigation resulted in his four-and-one-half month separation from his children. The jury awarded Tyner $201,500 in

Smith, J. Petitioner Kathleen O’Connor seeks direct review of orders of the King County Superior Court denying her request for public records under the public records act from Respondent Washington State Department of Social and Health Services and the Attorney General’s Office and directing Petitioner to seek records under the Superior Court Civil Rules for discovery. We granted review. We reverse. QUESTI

Owens, J. ¶1 In late 2003, a number of managers employed by appellant Verizon Northwest, Inc., chose to participate in a Voluntary Separation Program for Management Employees (MVSP). The former managers (the employees) then applied for and were granted unem*912ployment benefits. This case requires us to interpret the regulatory “employer-initiated layoff” exception to the

123 Wn.2d 1 (1993) 863 P.2d 1344 In the Matter of the Dependency of J.B.S. TERESA SCOTT, ET AL, Petitioners, v. THE DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL AND HEALTH SERVICES, ET AL, Respondents. No. 60084-8. The Supreme Court of Washington, En Banc. December 16, 1993. Speidel Law Firm and Earl W. Murdock, for petitioner Teresa Scott.

SEYMOUR, Circuit Judge. The Madsens, plaintiffs-appellants, borrowed money from Prudential Federal Savings & Loan Association (Prudential) to purchase a home in 1964. Pursuant to this loan, the Madsens signed a trust deed1 requiring them to make “budget payments” of one-twelfth of the annual estimated taxes and insurance along with their monthly payments of principal and interest. Under the agr

635 F.2d 797 Richard MADSEN and Nancy Madsen, his wife, for themselvesand all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs-Appellants,v.PRUDENTIAL FEDERAL SAVINGS & LOAN ASSOCIATION, for itselfand all others similarly situated, Defendant-Appellee,Utah Bankers Association, Intervenor-Appellee.Richard MADSEN and Nancy Madsen, for themselves and allothers similarly situated, Petitioners,v.Honorable Aldon J. ANDERSON, J

In the Iowa Supreme Court No. 23–1414 Submitted December 17, 2024—Filed May 9, 2025 League of United Latin American Citizens of Iowa, Appellee, vs. Iowa Secretary of State Paul Pate, in his official capacity; Iowa Voter Registration Commission; Buena Vista County Auditor Sue Lloyd, in her official capacity; C

Under the Employment Security Act (Act), a worker who is discharged due to "misconduct connected with his or her work" is disqualified from receiving unemployment compensation benefits. Former RCW 50.20.060(1). In this case, the Employment Security Department (Department) determined that Karen Tapper, a claimant for unemployment compensation, had been discharged for misconduct and therefore denied benefits. The Superior Court for Stevens County affir

Max Frankel and Tobia Frankel, Petitioners v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, RespondentFrankel v. CommissionerDocket No. 8872-81United States Tax Court

Owens, J. ¶1 Benton County District Court ordered petitioner Briana Wakefield to pay $15 each month toward her outstanding legal financial obligations (LFOs). Wake-field is homeless, disabled, and indigent. Her only income is $710 in social security disability payments each month, and as a result, she struggles to meet her own basic needs. Wakefield and amici ask this court to reverse the district court’s order and hold that the

' /F'fi:E IN CLERKS OFFICE " ' liUI'R£M!! COURT, GT.t.lE OF WASHINGTON SEP 2 2 2316 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON CITY OF RICHLAND, ) ) Respondent, ) No. 92594-1 ) V,

NOTICE: SLIP OPINION (not the court’s final written decision) The opinion that begins on the next page is a slip opinion. Slip opinions are the written opinions that are originally filed by the court. A slip opinion is not necessarily the court’s final written decision. Slip opinions can be changed by subsequent court orders. For example, a court may issue an order making substantive changes to a slip opinion or publishing for precedential pur