Attorney James R. Walsh's Legal Cases

Workers compensation

Elliot v. Department of Labor and Industries, Court of Appeals of Washington, Division 1.

Aug 03, 2009

OUTCOME: The Court of Appeals, Becker, J., held that: the denial of application for workers' compensation disability benefits was Affirmed.

Court of Appeals of Washington, Division 1. 151 Wash.App. 442, 213 P. 3d 44 (2009) Claimant sought judicial review of denial of application for workers' compensation disability benefits. The Super ... ior Court, Snohomish County, Gerald Knight, J., affirmed denial, and claimant appealed. The Court of Appeals, Becker, J., held that: 1 discovery rule applicable to claims for occupational disease did not apply to claimant's application for benefits for emotional injury sustained from witnessing coworker's fatal fall, and 2 emotional injury sustained from watching coworker fall to his death was not “occupational disease” such that application for disability benefits was governed by two-year limitations period.

Contracts and agreements

Johnson v. UBAR, LLC, Court of Appeals of Washington, Division 1.

Mar 30, 2009

OUTCOME: The Court of Appeals, Schindler, C.J., held that summary judgement was precluded, and that the King County Superior Court judgement was Reversed and Remanded.

Court of Appeals of Washington, Division 1. 150 Wash.App. 533, 150 Wash. App. 533(2009) Fitness club member filed a complaint against fitness club after she fell and was injured while working with ... a personal trainer. The Superior Court, King County, Nicole K. Macinnes, J., granted fitness club summary judgment. Member appealed. Holding: The Court of Appeals, Schindler, C.J., held that reasonable persons could disagree as to whether the waiver and release provision in fitness club membership agreement was conspicuously displayed, precluding summary judgment.

Workers compensation

Nghi Kim v. Alyeska Seafoods, Inc., Supreme Court of Alaska

Dec 05, 2008

OUTCOME: The Supreme Court, Winfree, J., held that: the denial of workers' compensation claim be Reversed and Remanded.

Kim v. Alyeska Seafoods, Inc. Supreme Court of Alaska No. S-12754. 197 P.3d 193 (2008) Claimant appealed from decision of Workers' Compensation Appeals Commission affirming Workers' Compensation ... Board's denial of workers' compensation claim. Holdings: The Supreme Court, Winfree, J., held that: 1 statute providing that if the employer controverts the workers' compensation claim and the claimant does not request a hearing within two years following the filing of the controversion notice, then the claim is denied, and requiring the request for hearing to be filed with an affidavit of readiness, is a procedural statute, and 2 the statute is directory rather than mandatory, and thus, substantial compliance with the statute, by filing a request for hearing without an affidavit of readiness but with a request for additional time to prepare for the hearing, is sufficient to toll the time-bar until the Workers' Compensation Board decides whether to grant more time.

Personal injury

Plouffe v. Rook, Court of Appeals of Washington, Division 1.

Oct 02, 2006

OUTCOME: Appellant was entitled to reinstatement of his lawsuit - Reversed and Remanded

Court of Appeals of Washington, Division 1. 135 Wash.App. 628 (2006) Five years after lawsuit was dismissed, petitioner filed a motion to reinstate his lawsuit. The Superior Court, Snohomish Count ... y, Arden Joel Bedle, J., denied the motion. Petitioner appealed. Holding: The Court of Appeals, Schindler, A.C.J., held that petitioner was entitled to reinstatement of his lawsuit.

Workers compensation

Stevedoring Services of America, Inc. v. Eggert, Supreme Court of Washington, En Banc.

Apr 18, 1996

OUTCOME: The Supreme Court, Madsen, J., held that: Court of Appeals reversed; trial court judgment reinstated Stevedore's recoupment of an overpayment of benefits.

Supreme Court of Washington, En Banc. 129 Wash.2d 17, 914 P. 2d 737 (1996) Stevedore brought suit against longshoreman, seeking to recoup overpayment of benefits paid under the Longshore and Harbor ... Workers' Compensation Act (LHWCA). Stevedore asserted claims of unjust enrichment, conversion, fraud, and intentional or negligent misrepresentation. The Superior Court, Snohomish County, David Hulbert, J., entered judgment in favor of stevedore for $96,651.55, and longshoreman appealed. The Court of Appeals, 76 Wash.App. 614, 886 P.2d 1174, reversed. Stevedore sought discretionary review. The Supreme Court, Madsen, J., held that: (1) LHWCA did not preempt stevedore's state law remedies for overpayment where no future payment was owing against which offset could be made; (2) stevedore's claims were not barred by res judicata or collateral estoppel; and (3) stevedore did not fail to exhaust administrative remedies. Court of Appeals reversed; trial court judgment reinstated.

Workers compensation

Loveridge v. Fred Meyer, Inc., Supreme Court of Washington, En Banc.

Jan 26, 1995

OUTCOME: The Supreme Court, Smith, J., held that the reversed and remanded summary judgment of the employer was Affirmed.

Female former employee brought action against employer seeking damages for sexual harassment. The Superior Court, Snohomish County, James H. Allendoerfer, J., entered summary judgment for employer, and ... employee appealed. The Court of Appeals, 72 Wash.App. 720, 864 P.2d 417, reversed and remanded. Employer sought review. The Supreme Court, Smith, J., held that consent decree in Equal Employment Opportunity Commission's (EEOC) Title VII action against employer did not bar, under doctrine of res judicata, employee's action.

Admiralty and maritime

Stevedoring Services of America, Inc. v. Eggert, Court of Appeals of Washington, Division 1

Jan 17, 1995

OUTCOME: The Court of Appeals, Coleman, J., held that: the order that required longshoreman to repay amount of overcompensation with interest was Reversed.

Stevedoring company brought state common-law action to recover approximately $96,000 in overcompensation it paid to longshoreman. The Superior Court, Snohomish County, David Hulbert, J., granted steved ... oring company's motion for summary judgment and ordered longshoreman to repay amount of overcompensation with interest. Longshoreman appealed. The Court of Appeals, Coleman, J., held that: (1) Longshore and Harbor Workers Compensation Act (LHWCA) did not contain any express preemption clauses, but (2) LHWCA occupies field of employer remedies for overpayment of compensation under LHWCA, including payments based on employee fraud, and thus stevedoring company's claims were preempted.

Workers compensation

Loveridge v. Fred Meyer, Inc., Court of Appeals of Washington, Division 1.

Dec 30, 1993

OUTCOME: The Court of Appeals, Pekelis, Acting C.J., held that the employer's summary judgment be Reversed and Remanded.

Employee filed complaint for sexual harassment against former employer, seeking damages for alleged negligence, “outrageous misconduct,” and violation of law against discrimination. The Superior Court, ... Snohomish County, James H. Allendoerfer, J., granted summary judgment for employer, and employee appealed. The Court of Appeals, Pekelis, Acting C.J., held that federal consent decree, which dismissed civil rights action initiated by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) against employer, did not, under federal rules of res judicata, preclude employee's lawsuit alleging state statutory and common-law claims.

Workers compensation

ITT Rayonier, Inc. v. Dalman, Supreme Court of Washington, En Banc.

Dec 09, 1993

OUTCOME: The Supreme Court, Utter, J., held that: the lack of sufficiency to establish Claimant's employability for purposes of workers' compensation is Affirmed.

Director of Department of Labor and Industries found that information in injured worker's case file was insufficient to establish his employability for purposes of workers' compensation, and sent case ... back to employer to make a more thorough employability determination. Employer appealed to administrative appeals judge who affirmed decision. Employer then appealed to Board of Industrial Insurance Appeals, which denied appeal and adopted administrative law judge's proposed opinion as its final order. Employer again appealed. The Superior Court, Clallam County, Grant S. Meiner, J., affirmed, and employer again appealed. The Court of Appeals, 67 Wash.App. 504, 837 P.2d 647,affirmed, and employer petitioned for review which was granted, 121 Wash.2d 1007, 852 P.2d 1090. The Supreme Court, Utter, J., held that: (1) failure of claimant to file written notice stating reasons for his challenge to employability decision within 15–day limit prescribed by regulation did not preclude review by Director, and (2) employer did not establish that Department's remand of employability determination to employer for additional information was arbitrary and capricious on ground that Department possessed necessary information to determine employability.

Workers compensation

ITT Rayonier, Inc. v. Dalman, Court of Appeals of Washington, Division 2.

Oct 02, 1992

OUTCOME: The Court of Appeals, Petrich, C.J., held that: the lack of sufficiency to establish employability of Claimant was Affirmed.

Department of Labor and Industries found worker to be employable, and, thus, no longer eligible for vocational services. On review of case, director of Department found that information in case file wa ... s insufficient to establish employability and returned case to employer. Employer appealed. The Board of Industrial Insurance Appeals affirmed, and employer appealed. The Superior Court, Clallam County, Grant S. Meiner, J., affirmed, and employer appealed. The Court of Appeals, Petrich, C.J., held that: (1) director had authority to consider dispute on his own initiative despite worker's failure to submit request for review within time limit imposed by administrative regulations, and (2) evidence in worker's case file was insufficient to make employability determination.

James R. Walsh's Legal Cases (12)

Elliot v. Department of Labor and Industries, Court of Appeals of Washington, Division 1.

Johnson v. UBAR, LLC, Court of Appeals of Washington, Division 1.

Nghi Kim v. Alyeska Seafoods, Inc., Supreme Court of Alaska

Plouffe v. Rook, Court of Appeals of Washington, Division 1.

Stevedoring Services of America, Inc. v. Eggert, Supreme Court of Washington, En Banc.

Loveridge v. Fred Meyer, Inc., Supreme Court of Washington, En Banc.

Stevedoring Services of America, Inc. v. Eggert, Court of Appeals of Washington, Division 1

Loveridge v. Fred Meyer, Inc., Court of Appeals of Washington, Division 1.

ITT Rayonier, Inc. v. Dalman, Supreme Court of Washington, En Banc.

ITT Rayonier, Inc. v. Dalman, Court of Appeals of Washington, Division 2.