Subscribe in a reader

ISSAQUAH LAW GROUP   PERSONAL INJURY LITIGATION LAWYERS

Issaquah Law Group - Injury Litigation Attorneys

TRUST: Personal injuries are personal. Which is why the attorneys at ILG treat every client and every case differently. Because they are different, and extremely personal. ILG was founded on the principle that strong client relationships are the key to successful legal representation and strong relationships are built on trust. Trust that you will be heard. Trust that you will be protected. Trust that every effort will be made to see justice done in your case. The singular goal of every ILG attorney is to earn and preserve that trust.

EXPERIENCE: ILG attorneys have a broad base of litigation experience to draw on in all Federal and State courts from on-the-ground investigations to Supreme Court appeals and we bring this experience to bear on behalf of our clients in personal injury and wrongful death claims arising out of motor vehicle accidents, bus versus pedestrian accidents, defective and dangerous products, medical malpractice, slip/trip and fall accidents, and catastrophic losses due to fire.

LOCATION: We are located on the Eastside in Issaquah, convenient to Bellevue, Redmond, Kirkland, Renton, Sammamish and North Bend. However, we provide legal services in King County, Pierce County, Snohomish County and throughout the entire state of Washington.

In addition, through The Amateur Law Professor Blog and LinkedIn postings, we share pertinent opinions and decisions of the Washington State Supreme Court, as well as the pertinent opinions and decisions of the Washington State Courts of Appeal so that our clients can be as update to date on cutting legal issues as we are.

WA Legal Roundup: Division II

In re the Dependency of KBOhhh- a dependency case not about taking away or keeping a child!! Appellant Ms. Rioux appeals the trial court’s decision for her request for attorneys fees and sanctions against DSHS, concluding that RCW 13.50.100(10) does not apply in guardianship proceedings, and concluding that civil rules of discovery are the exclusive means for seeking a remedy when DSHS does not provide records. Ms. Rioux informally requested records from DSHS pertaining to herself and her daughter. DSHS never complied. Ms. Rioux must have forgotten to pick up a copy of the civil rules book because the Court held (after deciding to review de novo) that due to not complying with the statutory provisions the Court is affirming the trial court’s ruling denying her request to sanction DSHS and snag her attorney’s fees as well as requiring her to comply with the civil rules of discovery when requesting records from DSHS as opposed to submitting a simple request. (Darn- we are required to submit formal requests for productions when we want to obtain records from the other side who would have thought?) The Court also ruled, and DSHS eventually conceded, that legislative intent of RCW 13.50.100(10), although fails to state dependency guardianship proceedings as a category applies to them nonetheless because of the procedural similarities between the category of cases listed and a dependency guardianship proceeding. The court ruled that the portion of the statute stating “subject to the rules of discovery in civil cases” interpreted to mean that when a party wants to request records relating to themselves and their children from DSHS they may do so by serving DSHS with interrogatories, requests for production, subpoenas duces tecum, deposition notices, and other discovery allowed under the civil rules.

Subscribe in a reader

Copyright 2014-2018 by Issaquah Law Group, PLLC. Powered by Squarespace. Background image by jakeliefer.