Our Cases: Earlier Cases

Representative Appellate Cases
We Have Won

(Pre-2014 Cases)

See also More Recent Cases

Past success is no guarantee of future outcomes.

  • Parentage of Infant Child F., 178 Wn. App. 1, 313 P.3d 451 (Div. 3, 2013) (successfully defended trial court’s determination that the Full Faith & Credit Clause protects a Utah adoption challenged in Washington).
  • Lisby v. PACCAR Inc., 178 Wn. App. 516, 316 P.2d 1097 (Div. 1, 2013) (successfully obtained reversal of trial court forum-non-conveniens-dismissal condition requiring a stipulation that Washington’s statute of repose will apply in Texas).
  • Jones v. City of Seattle, 179 Wn.2d 322, 314 P.3d 380 (2013), as amended (2014) (successfully defended a $12.75 million verdict in favor of a Seattle Firefighter who suffered a permanent disabling brain injury when he fell 15.5 feet down an unguarded pole hole onto a concrete floor in the middle of the night, both in the appellate court (9-0 Supreme Court)).
  • Marriage of McDermott, 175 Wn. App. 467, 307 P.3d 717 (Div. 1, 2013) (successfully defended trial court decision declining jurisdiction in favor of Kansas, where Kansas-resident parents’ temporary absence in Costa Rica counted toward Kansas’ status as child’s “home state”), rev. denied 179 Wn.2d 1004 (2013).
  • Piel v. City of Federal Way, 177 Wn.2d 604, 306 P.2d 879 (2013) (successfully obtained direct review of a summary judgment dismissal, reversal (6-1), and remand for trial of a tort claim for wrongful discharge in violation of public policy).
  • Bale v. Allison, 173 Wn. App. 435, 294 P.2d 789 (Div. 1, 2013) (successfully obtained reversal of trial court ruling voiding a quit-claim deed and remand for judgment in our clients’ favor, and successfully resisted opponents’ cross-appeal on numerous other issues, obtaining fee award for resisting cross-appeal).
  • Fiore v. PPG Indus., 169 Wn. App. 325, 279 P.3d 972 (Div. 1, 2012) (successfully defended summary judgment that employee was not exempt from the Wage Act, obtained affirmance of a mid-six-figures fee award, and an award of fees on appeal), rev. denied 175 Wn.2d 1027 (2012).
  • Hu v. State, Wash. Ct. App. No. 66334-8 (Div. 1, Settled 2012) (successfully assisted Mike McKinstry and represented Koti Hu in obtaining a nearly $20 million settlement on the eve of oral argument in the Court of Appeals, in an appeal arising from an even larger jury verdict finding that the State negligently designed the I-405 onramp where Hu was rear-ended, rendering him quadriplegic).
  • Parentage of T.H.B., Wash. Ct. App. No. 40119-3 (Div. 2, May 8, 2012) (successfully obtained reversal of a decision granting primary residential parentage to wife and remand for trial on that issue).
  • Gendler v. Batiste, 174 Wn.2d 244, 274 P.3d 346 (2012) (successfully obtained a strong decision under the Public Records Act).
  • Estate of Sowder, Wash. Ct. App. No. 40930-5 (Div. 2, Jan. 24, 2012) (successfully defended a probate decision rejecting various challenges to trust provisions and breach of fiduciary duty claims).
  • Spradlin Rock Prods., Inc. v. PUD No. 1 of Grays Harbor Cty., 164 Wn. App. 641, 266 P.3d 229 (Div. 2, 2011) (successfully obtained affirmance of a $4 million jury verdict based on an oral agreement, where the trial court had filled-in the price term on summary judgment, based on several paid invoices).
  • Blair v. TA-Seattle East No. 176, 171 Wn.2d 342, 254 P.3d 797 (2011) (successfully obtained unanimous decision reversing the trial and appellate courts’ dismissal of plaintiff’s case as a discovery sanction, and remand for trial).
  • Moeller v. Farmers Ins. Co. of Wa., 155 Wn. App. 133, 229 P.3d 587 (Div. 2, 2010), aff’d. on other grnds., 173 Wn.2d 264 (2011) (appeared and successfully obtained (a) decision pending on appeal since 2005; (b) reversal of a summary judgment in a large class action; (c) decision of the legal issue in our client’s favor; (d) affirmance of the class certification, and (e) affirmance by the Supreme Court of both the class certification and a holding that the insurance contract covered post-repair diminution of value, remanding for trial). Court of Appeals Decision. Supreme Court Decision.
  • Andrews v. Harrison Med. Cntr., Wash. Ct. App. No. 39554-1 (Div. 2, November 18, 2010) (successfully obtained reversal of a summary judgment dismissing an action for discrimination on the basis of marital status, denial of Supreme Court review, and remand for trial), rev. denied 171 Wn.2d 1035 (2011).
  • Le & Assocs, P.S. v. Diaz-Luong, Wash. Ct. App. No. 61912-8 (Div. 1, Aug. 23, 2010) (successfully defended contempt citations and sanctions against two lawyers), rev. denied 171 Wn.2d 1002 (2011).
  • Magaña v. Hyundai Motors, 167 Wn.2d 570, 220 P.3d 191 (2009), as amended (2010) (successfully obtained reinstatement of trial court’s entry of default judgment for $8 million, as sanction for willful discovery violations).
  • Johnson v. King County (Metro Transit), 148 Wn. App. 220, 198 P.3d 546 (Div. 1, 2009) (successfully obtained reversal of summary judgment based on notice of claim statute and remand for trial).
  • Carroll v. Elzey, Wash. Ct. App. No. 59891-1 (Div. 1, Aug. 25, 2008) (successfully defended partition order dividing millions of dollars in previously undisclosed marital assets).
  • 3601 Group Inc. v. Alfalfas Northwest, Wash. Ct. App. No. 59237-8 (Div. 1, Feb. 11, 2008) (successfully defended significant damages verdict after remand).
  • Mitchell v. Price, Wash. Ct. App. No. 35291-5 (Div. 2, June 24, 2008) (successfully obtained reversal of summary judgment dismissing fraud claims and imposing sanctions).
  • Thola v. Henschell, 140 Wn. App. 70, 164 P.3d 524 (2007) (successfully obtained reversal of a jury verdict based on vicarious liability under the Uniform Trade Secrets Act).
  • Williams v. Davies, No. Wash. Ct. App. No. 33366-0 (Div. 2, Feb. 7, 2007) (successfully defended judgment for $333,000 for negligent infliction of emotional distress).
  • Lafferty v. Stevens Memorial Hospital, Wash. Ct. App. No. 56313-1 (Div. 1, Dec. 26, 2006) (successfully defended $17 million jury verdict for medical negligence).
  • Benskin v. City of Fife, Wash. Ct. App. No. 31523-8 (Div. 2, Oct. 18, 2005) (successfully obtained reversal of summary judgment and remand for trial in case involving probation supervision), rev. denied 158 Wn.2d 1003 (2006).
  • Marriage of Bostain, Wash. Ct. App. No. 30450-3 (Div. 2, May 17, 2005) (successfully defended finding of meretricious relationship and division of property).
  • Bunch v. King Cnty., 155 Wn. 2d 165, 116 P.3d 381 (2005) (successfully obtained reinstatement of jury verdict following remittitur by Court of Appeals).
  • Kim v. Han, Wash. Ct. App. No. 31660-9 (Div. 2, July 7, 2005) (successfully obtained reversal of summary judgment and remand for trial of breach of commercial lease claims).
  • Parentage of M.S., 128 Wn. App. 408, 115 P.3d 405 (2005) (successfully obtained reversal of order dismissing alleged father’s petition to establish parentage).
  • Mullen v. Physicians Ins., Wash. Ct. App. No. 56021-2 (Div. 1, Nov. 21, 2005) (successfully obtained reversal of summary judgment dismissing claims of bad faith and Consumer Protection Act violations against malpractice insurer).
  • Bishop of Vict. Corp. Sole v. Finley, Wash. Ct. App. No. 29321-8 (Div. 2, May 11, 2004) (successfully defended summary judgment dismissing claim against real property arising out of a failed partnership), rev. denied, 152 Wn.2d 1012 (2004).
  • Fallahzadeh v. Ghorbanian, 119 Wn. App. 596, 82 P.3d 684 (2004) (successfully obtained reversal of a several hundred-thousand-dollar judgment based on an illegal contract and dismissal of the action against our client).
  • Hoel v. Rose, 125 Wn. App. 14, 105 P.3d 395 (2004) (successfully obtained reversal of judgment of negligent misrepresentation in a real estate transaction due to absence of justifiable reliance by the purchasers).
  • Lesher v. Murphy, Wash. Ct. App. No. 52040-7 (Div. 1, Nov. 22, 2004) (successfully defended personal injury verdict of $550,000).
  • Rich v. Bellevue School District, Wash. Ct. App. No. 51538-1 (Div. 1, July 12, 2004) (successfully defended verdict and attorney fee award in employment discrimination case).
  • 3601 Group Inc. v. Alfalfas Northwest, Wash. Ct. App. No. 51329-0 (Div. 1, Dec. 1, 2003), rev. denied, 152 Wn.2d 1017 (2004) (successfully obtained a new trial after the jury rendered an inadequate verdict due to improper damages instructions).
  • Mader v. Health Care Authority, 149 Wn.2d 458, 70 P.3d 931 (2003) (successfully obtained reversal of trial and appellate court holding denying health care benefits to community college instructors who consistently teach half-time or more for nine months of the year).
  • Postema v. Postema Enters., Inc, 118 Wn. App. 185, 72 P.3d 1122 (Div. 1, 2003) (successfully obtained reversal of verdict for failure to instruct jury properly on the right of a non-custodial parent to bring action for the wrongful death of a child).
  • Almquist v. Finley Sch. Dist., 114 Wn. App. 395, 57 P.3d 1191 (Div. 3, 2002) (successfully defended $4.75 million verdict for 11 children injured in e. coli outbreak).
  • Herrington v. Hawthorne, 111 Wn. App. 824, 47 P.3d 567 (Div. 1, 2002) (successfully obtained reversal of summary judgment in action under Washington State Securities Act arising from multi-million-dollar securities fraud scheme).
  • Microsoft v. Timeline, Wash. Ct. App. No. 47888-5-I (Div. 1, March 4, 2002) (successfully obtained reversal of declaratory judgment interpreting software contract), rev. denied 147 Wn.2d 1023 (2002).
  • Marriage of Rideout, 110 Wn. App. 370, 40 P.3d 1192 (Div. 2, 2002), aff’d., 150 Wn.2d 337 (2003) (successfully defended contempt order for failure to comply with court ordered visitation). Court of Appeals Decision. Supreme Court Decision.
  • Smith v. Behr, 113 Wn. App. 306, 54 P.3d 665 (Div. 1, 2002) (successfully defended default order in major class action for defendant’s failure to produce key evidence in response to repeated discovery requests).
  • Marriage of Wallace, 111 Wn. App. 697, 45 P.3d 1131 (Div. 2, 2002) (successfully defended property division in marriage dissolution action), rev. denied 148 Wn.2d 1011 (2003).
  • Gay v. Snohomish Cnty., Wash. Ct. App. No. 44042-0 (Div. 1, Jan. 16, 2001) (successfully defended verdict for failure to accommodate disabled employee).
  • Guillen v. Pierce Cnty., 144 Wn.2d 696, 31 P.3d 628 (2001), rev’d and remanded, 537 U.S. 129, 123 S. Ct. 720, 154 L. Ed. 2d 610 (2003) (successfully challenged the constitutionality of 23 U.S.C. 409 on the grounds that it could not be sustained under the spending power, the commerce clause, or the supremacy clause. Our clients achieved a successful settlement from Pierce County, the County petitioned for review from the companion case (involving the Guillens), and the United States Supreme Court reversed the Guillen decision). Washington Supreme Court Decision. U.S. Supreme Court Decision.
  • Roberts v. King Cnty., 107 Wn. App. 806, 27 P.3d 1267 (Div. 1, 2001) (successfully obtained reinstatement of equal pay action for class of employees of King County).
  • Guardianship of Tobey, Wash. Ct. App. No. 47739-1 (Div. 1, Dec. 17, 2001) (successfully defended determination that client is competent to handle her own financial affairs).
  • Winbun v. Moore, 143 Wn.2d 206, 18 P.3d 576 (2001) (successfully obtained reinstatement of $800,000 verdict for medical malpractice).
  • Beckman v. DSHS, 102 Wn. App. 687, 11 P.3d 313 (Div. 2, Sept. 12, 2000) (successfully resisted extension of deadline for an appeal from a $17.8 million judgment).
  • Denn v. Anderson, Wash. Ct. App. No. 42954-0 (Div. 1, Feb. 14, 2000) (successfully obtained reversal of judgment in excess of $200,000 for breach of the duty of good faith and remand for entry of judgment in favor of client).
  • John Doe v. Gonzaga, 99 Wn. App. 338, 992 P.2d 545 (Div. 1, 2000), rev’d, 143 Wn.2d 687 (2001), rev’d in part, 536 U.S. 273, 153 L. Ed. 2d 309, 122 S. Ct. 2268 (2002) (successfully obtained reversal of $450,000 verdict based on violation of federal funding statute). Court of Appeals Decision. Washington Supreme Court Decision. U.S. Supreme Court Decision, Concurrence, and Dissent.