Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law
Washington Lawyers Under The Purview Of The State Consumer Protection Act—The "Entrepreneurial Aspects" Solution—Short V. Demopolis, 103 Wn. 2d 52, 691 P.2d 163 (1984), Jeffrey M. Koontz
Washington Lawyers Under The Purview Of The State Consumer Protection Act—The "Entrepreneurial Aspects" Solution—Short V. Demopolis, 103 Wn. 2d 52, 691 P.2d 163 (1984), Jeffrey M. Koontz
Washington Law Review
In Short v. Demopolis the Washington Supreme Court held that certain "entrepreneurial aspects" of the practice of law constitute "trade or commerce" for purposes of RCW 19.86, Washington's consumer protection and antitrust law. This holding brings members of the legal community under antitrust and consumer protection scrutiny as embodied in the Consumer Protection Act (CPA). The Demopolis decision, however, only applies to the "entrepreneurial aspects" of the practice of law. Although many courts and commentators have struggled with the question of whether professionals should be given preferential treatment, the Washington court is the first to specifically exclude legal malpractice from …
Washington Lawyers Under The Purview Of The State Consumer Protection Act—The "Entrepreneurial Aspects" Solution—Short V. Demopolis, 103 Wn. 2d 52, 691 P.2d 163 (1984), Jeffrey M. Koontz
Washington Lawyers Under The Purview Of The State Consumer Protection Act—The "Entrepreneurial Aspects" Solution—Short V. Demopolis, 103 Wn. 2d 52, 691 P.2d 163 (1984), Jeffrey M. Koontz
Washington Law Review
In Short v. Demopolis the Washington Supreme Court held that certain "entrepreneurial aspects" of the practice of law constitute "trade or commerce" for purposes of RCW 19.86, Washington's consumer protection and antitrust law. This holding brings members of the legal community under antitrust and consumer protection scrutiny as embodied in the Consumer Protection Act (CPA). The Demopolis decision, however, only applies to the "entrepreneurial aspects" of the practice of law. Although many courts and commentators have struggled with the question of whether professionals should be given preferential treatment, the Washington court is the first to specifically exclude legal malpractice from …
Practice Of Law: Real Estate Brokers Authorized To Complete Transaction Forms—Cultum V. Heritage House Realtors, Inc., 103 Wn. 2d 623, 694 P.2d 630 (1985), Mark Reeve
Washington Law Review
In Cultum v. Heritage House Realtors, Inc., the Washington Supreme Court carved out a limited exception to the statutory prohibition against the unauthorized practice of law. This new exception represents a proper balancing of the interests of real estate brokers, lawyers and the public. However, flaws in the majority's reasoning may lead to confusion in the future application of the ruling unless greater attention is paid to the underlying rationale of the decision and the arguments made by the concurrence.
Implementing The Incentive Purpose Of The Private Attorney General Exception—Miotke V. City Of Spokane, 101 Wn. 2d 307, 678 P.2d 803 (1984), Jim Oesterle
Washington Law Review
This Note proposes both selective criteria and a procedure designed to implement the unique purpose of the private attorney general exception. The Note first describes the development of the private attorney general exception in both federal and state courts, and then traces the development of equitable exceptions in Washington. The analysis begins by identifying and comparing the purposes of the private attorney general, common fund, and substantial benefit exceptions, and critiques the ability of the Miotke standard to implement the purpose of the private attorney general exception. The analysis then proposes more discriminating criteria and a procedural approach that effectively …