Subscribe in a reader


Issaquah Law Group - Personal 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

State of Washington v. Russell

Russell was changed with first degree child rape and domestic abuse regarding alleged abuse that occurred in Bremerton, Washington.  The abuse of the child occurred over several years and in different locations around the country, as the family moved often.  Evidence of  Russell’s abuse in several locations throughout the US were admitted under ER 404(b).  Russell was convicted and appeals, arguing that the trial court abused its discretion by admitting the ER 404(b) evidence without a limiting instruction. 

The appeals court interprets ER rule 404(b).  The court held that while it may be appropriate to admit the evidence under the exception of showing a lustful disposition, certain requirements must be met prior to admission.  Here, the court held that even when the evidence is permitted, a limiting instruction must be given.  The court found that because no limiting instruction was given, the trial court abused its discretion.  Russell’s conviction was reversed and remanded for a new trial. 

Subscribe in a reader

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