That rule regards surface water "as an outlaw and a common enemy against which anyone may defend himself, even though . . . injury may result to others." Cass v. Dicks, 14 Wn. at 78; see also Island Cy. v. Mackie, 36 Wn. App. 385, 388, 675 P.2d 607, review denied, 101 Wn.2d 1008 (1984). "In its extreme form, the rule provides that, incident to the rights of land ownership, each landowner has an unqualified legal privilege to develop his or her land without regard for the drainage consequences to other landowners."
Trigg, 90 wash. at 682.Island County v. Mackie, 36 Wn. App. 385, 389, 675 P.2d 607 (1984).Mackie, 36 Wn. App. at 390.91.
¶ 41 Although landowners may block the flow of diffuse surface water onto their land, the first exception provides that landowners may not inhibit the flow of a watercourse or a natural drainway.Island County v. Mackie, 36 Wash.App. 385, 388, 675 P.2d 607 (1984). Another exception prevents landowners from collecting water and channeling it onto their neighbors' land.
¶ 41 Although landowners may block the flow of diffuse surface water onto their land, the first exception provides that landowners may not inhibit the flow of a watercourse or a natural drainway.Island County v. Mackie, 36 Wash.App. 385, 388, 675 P.2d 607 (1984). Another exception prevents landowners from collecting water and channeling it onto their neighbors' land.
“This court may rely on unpublished opinions as evidence of the facts established in earlier proceedings in the same case or in a different case involving the same parties.” Martin v. Wilbert, 162 Wash.App. 90, 93 n. 1, 253 P.3d 108,review denied,173 Wash.2d 1002, 268 P.3d 941 (2011) (citing Island County v. Mackie, 36 Wash.App. 385 n. 3, 675 P.2d 607 (1984)). 2. New 2011 First Degree Perjury Bench Trial Conviction and Direct Appeal
"This court may rely on unpublished opinions as evidence of the facts established in earlier proceedings in the same case or in a different case involving the same parties." Martin v. Wilbert, 162 Wn.App. 90, 93 n. 1, 253 P.3d 108, review denied, 173 Wn.2d 1002 (2011) (citing Island County v. Mackie, 36 Wn.App. 385, 391 n. 3, 675 P.2d 607 (1984)).
This court may rely on unpublished opinions as evidence of the facts established in earlier proceedings in the same case or in a different case involving the same parties. Island County v. Mackie, 36 Wn. App. 385, 391 n. 3, 675 P.2d 607 (1984). This court may also consider unpublished opinions in examining issues such as the law of the case, collateral estoppel, and res judicata.
We may rely on unpublished opinions as evidence of the facts established in earlier proceedings in the same case or in a different case involving the same parties. Island County v. Mackie, 36 Wn. App. 385, 391 n. 3, 675 P.2d 607 (1984). We may also consider unpublished opinions in examining issues such as the law of the case, collateral estoppel, and res judicata.
We note that an UNPUBLISHED OPINION may be used as evidence of the facts established in earlier proceedings in the same case or in a different case involving the same parties. Island County v. Mackie, 36 Wn. App. 385, 391 n. 3, 675 P.2d 607 (1984). Unpublished cases can also be cited to establish facts in a different case that are relevant to the current case involving the same parties.
An unpublished Court of Appeals' decision may not be cited as precedential authority on a point of law. RAP 10.4(h). But an unpublished opinion may be used as evidence of the facts established in earlier proceedings in the same case or in a different case involving the same parties. Island County v. Mackie, 36 Wn. App. 385, 391 n. 3, 675 P.2d 607 (1984). Davis appealed to this court, arguing that the trial court erred in finding that the two counts were not the "same criminal conduct" for purposes of calculating his offender score.