Curtin v. City of East Wenatchee, 457 P. 3d 470 (2020)
Feb 06, 2020OUTCOME: Parrents claims were time barred
Whether parents claims related to their injured minor child were time barred by the statute of limitations
Thomas Francis O'Connell's Legal Cases (6)
Wenatchee, WA
Litigation Lawyer at Wenatchee, WA
Practice Areas: Litigation, Construction & Development, Real Estate
Coalition of Chiliwist v. Okanogan County, 198 Wn App 1016 (2017)
Mar 16, 2017OUTCOME: Court of Appeals affirmed dismissal of Coalitions claims
Coalition of Chiliwist Residents and Friends (Coalition) appeals the dismissal of their complaint that sought to void the Board of County Commissioner's (BOCC) order vacating a portion of Three Devil ... s Road in Okanogan County
In Re Bond Issuance of Greater Wenatchee Regional Events Center Public Facilities District, 175 Wn. 2d 788 (2012)trict
Oct 25, 2012OUTCOME: City of Wenatchee taxpayers prevailed
State constitution limits municipal indebtedness to protect taxpayers. Issue was whether the city of Wenatchee exceeded its debt limit by entering into a contingent loan agreement to help finance the ... Town Toyota Center.
GFI-Wenatchee Investments v. For The Love of It, 157 Wn. App 1016 (2010)
Jul 29, 2010OUTCOME: The court conclude that the Store did not fall within the definition of an adult bookstore e.
GFI–Wenatchee developed a shopping center known as the K–Mart Plaza in Wenatchee. Hassett owned a commercial building in the development that they leased to For the Love of It, LLC, an adult boutique ... store (the Store). GFI sought an injunction , asserting that the Store violated the covenants, conditions, and restrictions and grant of easements (CCRs). The CCRs do not allow adult bookstores in the shopping center.
Rasmussen v. Bendotti, 107 Wn. App 947 (2001)
Aug 21, 2001OUTCOME: Defendant Bendotti prevailed
Scuba diver's breach of duty was not proximate cause of diving buddy's death in Lake Wenatchee.
Morisoli v. Sykora, 92 Wn. App 1061 (1998)
Oct 27, 1998OUTCOME: Morisoli was not required to give Ms. Sykora the “Notice to Customer” under RCW 18.27.114.
Lidka Sykora entered into a contract with Morisoli, d/b/a Maranatha Construction, to frame and roof her house. Ms. Sykora did not pay Morisoli so he filed a lien. He thereafter filed a complaint for ... breach of contract and foreclosure of the lien. Contending Morisoli failed to send her a “Notice to Customer” required by RCW 18.27.114, Ms. Sykora contested the foreclosure. The court entered a Judgment and Decree of Foreclosure in favor of Morisoli Ms. Sykora claims the court erred by concluding Morisoli was not required to give a “Notice to Customer” pursuant to RCW 18.27.114.
Ad
Transform legal challenges into solutions.
Connect now to review your situation.
