Subscribe in a reader


Issaquah Law Group: Experienced Counsel; Client Focus

PHILOSOPHY: Formed in 2014, Issaquah Law Group is a law firm with one focus: providing businesses and insurers with high quality legal representation with the responsiveness of a smaller firm. ILG was founded on the principle that strong client relationships are the key to successful legal representation and strong relationships are built upon clear and consistent communication. 

LITIGATION: We work closely with our clients to fully and accurately understand their goals, work collaboratively to formulate specific legal strategies, and execute the agreed plan of action utilizing methods most likely to result in the efficient and effective resolution of the matter. 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 in the areas of personal injury and wrongful death, product liability, commercial general liability, labor & employment, construction litigation, and catastrophic losses due to fire and explosion.

BUSINESS LAW: Rarely is the path from point A to point B a straight line, so our role in a business law practice is to find alternatives, devise workable strategies, and keep your business ideas, goals and objectives moving toward realization. ILG’s business attorneys help clients achieve their goals with respect to business formation, intellectual property, labor and employment, CAN-SPAM, copyright and trademark

COMMUNITY: In addition, the Lawyers at Issaquah Law Group remain active in the legal and civic community. A core commitment of our Issaquah Attorneys is community service. Our attorneys' civic involvement includes the King County Civil Rights Commission; the City of Issaquah Planning Policy Commission; the Northwest Screenwriters Guild, service as a pro tem judge. We live and work in the Pacific Northwest, and we aim to make it a better place.

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 - Div I: Budget's Over-Budget Bids Bounced By Becker (Kudos to Judge Becker for Making this Alliteration Work)

Cummings v. Budget Tank Removal & Environmental Svcs., LLC

Getting an art award overturned is tough, there has to be an error of law on the face of the award. Basically Budget tank was giving estimates of 20-40 grand and invoicing for 360-640 grand. A little bit of a difference. The arbitrations were consolidated, and the people who were screwed allegedly given vastly differing estimates by Budget got really good awards.

Budget moved to vacate based on the consolidation, but appealed the final order, including the alleged error. The court agreed that this fell under a final judgment appeal.

(1)  An appeal may be taken from:

(a)  An order denying a motion to compel arbitration;

(b) An order granting a motion to stay arbitration;

(c) An order confirming or denying confirmation of an award;

(d) An order modifying or correcting an award;

(e)  An order vacating an award without directing a rehearing; or

(f)  A final judgment entered under this chapter.

RCW 7.04A.280. However, a decision on consolidation is reviewed for an abuse of discretion. The parties were able to explain how their cases met the consolidation criteria in RCW 7.04.100(1), and the court was satisfied that the arbitrator considered those and thus consolidation was proper.

As to errors on the face of the award, the court gave a little bench slap, then gave a BUNCH of reasoning as to why. I won't put it here, you can go look it up:

Budget contends that the trial court improperly limited its review to the last two pages of the award and failed to consider whether the first 40 pages demonstrated recognizable error. It appears, however, that the court simply concluded that the issues raised by Budget were not reviewable. Having considered all 42 pages, we reach the same conclusion.

Side note: Don't think I'll be doing business with Budget (you know, if I ever needed tanks removed). I mean, off by a couple grand I can dig. Off by 2900%? That's a little bit of a problem.


Subscribe in a reader

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