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 - Washington State Supreme Court

Federal Way Sch. Dist. No. 210 v. State

The legislatures formulas for funding school's do not violate our State Constitutional mandate in Article IX, s. 2. Section 2 of Article IX states, "[t]he legislature shall provide for a general and uniform system of public schools." Uniformity doesn't mean uniform base salaries for everyone, but rather, "that 'every child shall have the same advantages and be subject to the same discipline as every other child.'  Sch. Dist. No. 20 v. Bryan, 51 Wash. 498, 502, 99 P. 28 (1909).

Our cases discussing article IX, section 2 make it clear that the provision requires uniformity in the educational program provided, not the minutiae of funding. Such details -- unless specifically mandated by the constitution -- are the province of the legislative branch. See Const. art. II, § 1 (legislative authority vested in the legislature, subject to powers reserved by the people); Const. art. IX, § 2 (mandating limits on the use of common school fund revenues). Federal Way School District fails to overcome the presumption that the statutory funding formulas are constitutional and fails to prove that the disparities in those formulas have violated article IX, section 2.

Federal Way also made an Article IX s. 1 argument that the State failed to fund all school districts the same. Unfortunately, the clause only requires ample funding, not uniform funding. No case has ever required that ample means uniform formulas for salary.

Finally, and this doesn't come up often, the court held that the individual parent claims weren't justiciable. The individual claimants tried to claim they were denied a benefit by the use of a different formula. However, the formula allocates money to the school, not to any individual, thus they had no claim to the moneys. They were unable to show any actual harm, unlike the Seattle Sch. Dist. No. 1 case, in which the levy program was alleged to have caused sufficient harm. The students, in fact, are above average.

Subscribe in a reader

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