John J. Tollefsen Law Blog

In Thompson v. Hanson, --- P.3d ---- (2009) the Supreme Court made it easier to reverse fraudulent conveyances – at least in the Eastern Division of Washington State.

Under Washington's Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act (UFTA), chapter 19.40 RCW, creditors have a cause of action against transferees who received fraudulently conveyed property of debtors. Division III added (“read in”) the requirement that there be intent to... Read More

Many causes of actions were invented by courts and are part of the unwritten common law. Negligence and negligent misrepresentation are examples of these court-made laws. To prove negligence the plaintiff must prove that the defendant owed a duty to the plaintiff. If the duty arises because there is a contract between the parties, courts have held that the plaintiff can only bring an action for breach of contract. A negligence action is not allowed. This is called the... Read More

Lunsford v. Saberhagen Holdings, Inc., --- P.3d ----, 2009 WL 1547826 (Wash. Jun 04, 2009) (NO. 80728-1-I)

When the Supreme Court announces a new rule of law or a change of existing law, the issues becomes whether it is applied to cases that arose prior to the ruling. The answer is that it depends on whether the court holds that it is prospective or retroactive. In explaining its ruling the court made the following comment: 

Strawn v. Farmers Ins. Co. of Oregon, --- P.3d ----, 2009 WL 1409471 (Or.App. May 20, 2009) (NO. A131605, 009809080)

A class action was filed complaining of defendants' claims handling of personal injury protection (PIP) benefits payments to their insureds. They used cost-containment software to evaluate their insureds' medical expenses in relation to other bills for the same procedure in a given region. If the charge submitted by an... Read More

In re F5 Networks, Inc., 207 P.3d 433 (Wash. May 21, 2009) (NO. 81817-7).

In a case of first impression, Washington’s Supreme Court decided that shareholders could sue on behalf of a Washington corporation without first making a demand on the board of directors if the demand would be futile.

Washington's corporate statute is based on the 1984 version of the Model Business Corporation Act, which did not contain... Read More

Chadwick Farms Owners ********'n v. FHC LLC, 207 P.3d 1251, 2009 WL 1333004 (Wash. May 14, 2009) (NO. 80450-8, 80459-1)

These consolidated cases involve the capacity of limited liability companies to sue and be sued after their certificates of formation are canceled pursuant to provisions in the Washington Limited Liability Company Act, RCW chapter 25.15 (the Act). Under the plain terms of the Act, a limited liability company ceases to... Read More

Weber v. Associated Surgeons, P.S., 206 P.3d 671, 2009 WL 1241275 (Wash. May 07, 2009) (NO. 82163-1)

The defendant doctor was the registered agent of the defendant doctor’s former medical corporation. The Court of Appeals held that the practice manager of the new medical corporation for which the registered agent worked could not accept service for the defendant doctor in his capacity as registered agent of the former medical corporation... Read More

Cox v. O'Brien, --- P.3d ----, 2009 WL 1204555 (Wash.App. Div. 2 May 05, 2009) (NO. 37194-4-II)

Purchasers of home brought action against inspector for negligent pest inspection. Inspector brought third-party claim against the sellers for breach of contract. Sellers filed fourth-party complaint against purchasers and inspector. Purchasers filed counterclaim against sellers for unjust enrichment. Following a bench trial on unjust-enrichment... Read More

Ledcor Industries (USA), Inc. v. Mutual of Enumclaw Ins. Co., --- P.3d ----, 2009 WL 1191783 (Wash.App. Div. 1 May 04, 2009) (NO. 59705-1-I)

Ledcor Industries (USA), Inc. alleged Mutual of Enumclaw (MOE) MOE failed to promptly accept Ledcor's tender of defense as an additional insured on its subcontractor's policy and failed to investigate or indemnify Ledcor resulting in liability for bad faith, breach of contract, and violations of the... Read More

Vance v. XXXL Development, LLC, --- P.3d ----, 2009 WL 1202596 (Wash.App. Div. 2 May 05, 2009) (NO. 37503-6-II)

In 1988, Vance bought a house in Longview, Washington for $205,000. In 2006, XXXL sought approval for a residential development just to the north of Vance's property. It constructed a retaining wall two feet from Vance's property line. The concrete block wall is approximately 25 feet high and more than 100 feet long.