My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
3135 TULALIP AVE 2017-09-06
>
Address Records
>
TULALIP AVE
>
3135
>
3135 TULALIP AVE 2017-09-06
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/6/2017 3:57:52 PM
Creation date
8/25/2017 11:18:00 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Address Document
Street Name
TULALIP AVE
Street Number
3135
Imported From Microfiche
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
63
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
1 Examiner are similar to other court proceedings.32 Although the rules of evidence do not apply, <br /> 2 each party is able to present its case, ask questions of its own and the opposing party's witnesses, <br /> 3 present evidence,and prepare proposed findings. Public policy favors collateral estoppel applying <br /> 4 to an Examiner's decision in a code enforcement matter for the same reasons stated by the U.S. <br /> 5 Supreme Court in Astoria: a party should not get a second bite at the apple when the issue <br /> 6 determined at the administrative level is identical to that before the judiciary. <br /> 7 <br /> Yost has had her day in court,has had the opportunity to challenge the City's allegations, <br /> 8 <br /> and the Examiner decided that the conditions that were the subject matter of the code enforcement <br /> 9 <br /> 10 hearing existed and were violations of the EMC. The conditions are nuisances by virtue of the <br /> 11 Examiner's express finding or because of his finding that they violate the IPMC or IRC. Yost <br /> 12 should be estopped fiom challenging the status of the conditions as public nuisances and the Court <br /> 13 should grant this summary judgment motion. <br /> 14 C. Conditions on the Property are Public Nuisances Pursuant to Chapter 7.48 <br /> 15 RCW. <br /> 16 Even if the Examiners' order was not binding,the Court should rule on summary judgment <br /> 17 that public nuisances exist on the Yost property,based on the uncontested evidence presented to <br /> 18 the Court demonstrating as a matter of law that the Yost Property is a public nuisance. <br /> 19 Under Washington,a nuisance and a public nuisance are defined as follows: <br /> 20 <br /> 21 NUISANCE <br /> Nuisance consists in unlawfully doing an act, or omitting to perform a duty, which <br /> 22 act or omission either annoys,injures or endangers the comfort,repose,health or <br /> 23 safety of others, offends decency ... or in any way renders other persons insecure in <br /> life or in the use of property. <br /> 24 <br /> 25 <br /> 12 The Rules of Procedure for code enforcement hearings can be found at <br /> ht_tpsale-lerethva.aov,,DocuinentCeiiter Homcf"Viewi787. <br /> Yost Summary Judgment Motion OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY <br /> Page 12 of 23 CITY OF EVERETT <br /> 2930 Wetmore Avenue,10-C <br /> Everett WA 98201 <br /> (425)257-7000 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.