Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Law
Miotke V. City Of Spokane: Nuisance Or Inverse Condemnation—Theories For Government Environmental Liability, Gary L. Baker
Miotke V. City Of Spokane: Nuisance Or Inverse Condemnation—Theories For Government Environmental Liability, Gary L. Baker
Seattle University Law Review
A recent decision by the Washington State Supreme Court, Miotke v. City of Spokane, may broadly affect the right to and type of recovery that will be available to persons whose property rights are infringed either by an agent of the state or by private parties. Miotke involved the dumping of untreated sewage into a river, with the sewage flowing into a lake and interfering with lakefront property owners' enjoyment of their property. The court in Miotke faced a set of claims in property, tort, and state environmental law. The court recognized the significance of its decision and the …
On The Propriety Of The Public Interest Requirement In The Washington Consumer Protection Act—Wash. Rev. Code § 19.86, Susan K. Storey
On The Propriety Of The Public Interest Requirement In The Washington Consumer Protection Act—Wash. Rev. Code § 19.86, Susan K. Storey
Seattle University Law Review
This Note discusses first, whether the judicially created public interest element of a private consumer protection case can be justified by the language of the Consumer Protection Act and, second, assuming some justification for the element can be found, whether the public interest test, as delineated in Anhold v. Daniels and Hangman Ridge Training Stables, Inc. v. Safeco Title Insurance Co. serves a purpose intended by the legislature.” This Note concludes that the public interest element is unnecessary because it hinders and often prevents consumer litigation of private damage actions under the Act. Moreover, the public interest element cannot be …