Island County v. Mackie

28 Citing cases

  1. Hedlund v. White

    67 Wn. App. 409 (Wash. Ct. App. 1992)   Cited 25 times
    Finding injunction appropriate for an ongoing trespass

    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."

  2. Snohomish County v. Postema

    978 P.2d 1101 (Wash. Ct. App. 1998)   Cited 3 times

    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.

  3. Hoover v. Warner

    189 Wn. App. 509 (Wash. Ct. App. 2015)

    ¶ 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.

  4. Hoover v. Warner

    189 Wn. App. 509 (Wash. Ct. App. 2015)

    ¶ 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.

  5. State v. Arquette

    178 Wn. App. 273 (Wash. Ct. App. 2013)   Cited 5 times

    “This court may rely on unpublished opinions as evidence of the facts established in earlier proceedings in the same case or in a different case involving the same parties.”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

  6. State v. Barton

    No. 41777-4-II (Wash. Ct. App. Jul. 17, 2012)

    "This court may rely on unpublished opinions as evidence of the facts established in earlier proceedings in the same case or in a different case involving the same parties."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)).

  7. Martin v. Wilbert

    162 Wn. App. 90 (Wash. Ct. App. 2011)   Cited 15 times

    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.

  8. Martin v. Ellis

    154 Wn. App. 1041 (Wash. Ct. App. 2010)   Cited 1 times

    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.

  9. In re Delguzzi

    150 Wn. App. 1058 (Wash. Ct. App. 2009)

    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.

  10. In the Matter of the Personal Restraint of Davis

    95 Wn. App. 917 (Wash. Ct. App. 1999)   Cited 6 times

    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.