Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Serving The "Apparently Under The Influence" Patron: The Ramifications Of Barrett V. Lucky Seven Saloon, Inc., Kathryn M. Knudsen
Serving The "Apparently Under The Influence" Patron: The Ramifications Of Barrett V. Lucky Seven Saloon, Inc., Kathryn M. Knudsen
Seattle University Law Review
In Barrett v. Lucky Seven Saloon, Inc., the Washington Supreme Court erroneously expanded commercial vendor liability to third parties who are injured in automobile accidents by a patron who drives while impaired. This decision flies in the face of Washington vendor liability jurisprudence, which has shown a reluctance to hold vendors liable for negligently serving alcohol; prior to Barrett, courts would not do so unless the patron was a minor or was "obviously intoxicated." Nevertheless, Barrett rejected the common law "obviously intoxicated" rule in exchange for a new form of civil liability based on a criminal statute that …
Electoral Recall In Washington State And California: California Needs Stricter Standards To Protect Elected Officials From Harassment, Joshua Osborne-Klein
Electoral Recall In Washington State And California: California Needs Stricter Standards To Protect Elected Officials From Harassment, Joshua Osborne-Klein
Seattle University Law Review
This article highlights the weaknesses of the electoral recall mechanisms in California and the way in which the Washington recall process has avoided such weaknesses. Part II provides general background information on the development of recall mechanisms. Part III explores how the United States Supreme Court has ruled on recall attempts and the specific guidance the Court has provided for states in developing adequately protective recall processes. Part IV analyzes the strengths and weaknesses of the California recall provisions by examining the recall-related opinions of California courts and the complexities of Governor Davis's recall. Part V provides a solution to …
Lindsey V. Tacoma-Pierce County Health Department: Cipollone Revisited, Billboards, State Law Tort Damages Actions, Federal Preemption And The Federal Cigarette Labeling And Advertising Act, Harold C. Reeder
Seattle University Law Review
The Article evaluates Lindsey and other recent cases dealing with local regulations restricting tobacco advertising; it also examines their respective preemption analyses, suggesting that the use of the FCLAA's preemption provision against such regulations is unwarranted. The article argues that in Lindsey, the Ninth Circuit misconstrued the Supreme Court's discussion of the preemptive scope of the FCLAA by failing to read it in the proper contex and that the FCLAA's preemption provision was not intended to prevent the particular types of regulations involved in Lindsey and these other cases. It argues that the preemption provision was only meant to …