Injunction bonds for injunctions affecting public construction contracts. 7.40.090. Bond for injunction after temporary restraining order. 7.40.100. Copy of order serves as writ. 7.40.110. Stay of judgment — Release of errors. 7.40.120. Injunction, who is bound by.
AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF 1 ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WASHINGTON Complex Litigation Division 800 5th Avenue, Suite 2000 Seattle, WA 98104-3188 ... unlawful because it was issued without adequate notice and an opportunity for public comment, and is unconstitutional. II. PARTIES : ... injunctive relief, and other relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201– ...
General powers not restricted by express enumeration. The enumeration in RCW 7.24.020 and 7.24.030 does not limit or restrict the exercise of the general powers conferred in RCW 7.24.010, in any proceeding where declaratory relief is sought, in which a judgment or decree will terminate the controversy or remove an uncertainty. [ 1985 c 9 § 2.
Feb 24, 2022 · Providence hospitals sent to collections more than 50,000 accounts of charity care eligible patients. SEATTLE — Attorney General Bob Ferguson announced today a consumer protection lawsuit against five Swedish hospitals and nine Providence-affiliated facilities for failing to ensure that eligible low-income Washingtonians receive the discounts to which they …
Telephone1-800-551-4636 (in-state only)1-206-464-6684 (out-of-state callers)1-800-833-6388 (Washington State Relay Service for the hearing impaired)
Bob Ferguson (Democratic Party)Washington / Attorney generalRobert Watson Ferguson is an American lawyer and politician serving as the 18th attorney general of Washington. A member of the Democratic Party, he was first elected in 2012 and re-elected in 2016 and 2020. Prior to serving as Attorney General, Ferguson was a member of the King County Council. Wikipedia
A popular way to collect on your judgment award is by a writ of garnishment. A garnishment entitles a judgment creditor to garnish and take the proceeds belonging to the debtor. It is typically used to garnish wages being paid by an employer or to garnish the proceeds in the debtor's bank account.Sep 3, 2014
The Washington state tort process begins with you filing a written notice of your claim with the government. You do this by filling out and filing a tort claim form. Remember that this form is not equivalent to a lawsuit.Jul 14, 2021
If you have a complaint about a business, you can contact the Better Business Bureau at 206-431-2222 and also the Consumer Protection division of the Washington State Attorney General's Office at 206-464-6684 or 1-800-551-4636 .Nov 25, 2020
$95,083 per yearThe typical Attorney General of Washington State Assistant Attorney General salary is $95,083 per year. Assistant Attorney General salaries at Attorney General of Washington State can range from $69,396 - $133,169 per year.
In Washington, the creditor must wait 10 days in superior court (Rule CR 62) and 30 days in district court before they can serve the Writ of Garnishment. The creditor will need to apply for and serve a new writ every 60 days until the debt is paid, but they don't need to file a new lawsuit every 60 days.Jan 5, 2022
$10,000Small Claims Courts in the State of Washington are designed to be a user-friendly, low-cost way of settling legal disputes up to $10,000 (when brought by a person). Find out everything you need to know about small claims suits with this handy FAQ.
Ask the court for help.Do not use illegal ways to collect your money. The debtor may be protected from abusive or unfair ways to collect the debt. ... Encourage the debtor to pay you voluntarily. ... Be organized.Ask a lawyer or collection agency for help. ... Make sure you renew your judgment. ... Ask the court for help.
Washington State's defamation statute of limitations is two years....To win a defamation lawsuit in Washington State, plaintiffs must prove (at the very least) that their respective defendants:Made a false and unprivileged statement of fact about the claimant;Caused harm to befall the plaintiff, through statements; and.More items...
If you lose your claim you will have to pay your own costs. You do not have to pay the defendant's costs when using the small claims track unless you have failed to follow protocol.
"Since it is an office of the Government created by the State, 'it is elemental that the state or sovereign cannot be sued in its own courts without its consent.
Washington’s Reproductive Parity Act requires all health plans that provide coverage for maternity care or services to also provide substantially equivalent coverage for abortion services (with exceptions for certain federally mandated accommodations). Wash. Rev. Code § 48.43.073.
19. Title 1, subtitle D of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 (PPACA) provides for the establishment of state health benefit exchanges on which issuers may offer QHPs. 42 U.S.C. § 18031(b).
37. As noted above, HHS and CMS’s 2015 Rule provided that QHP issuers could comply with Section 130 3 by sending enrollees a single monthly invoice that itemizes the premium amounts for federally-fundable and non-federally-fundable covered services, and accepting the monthly premium payment via a single transaction.
In any proceeding which involves the validity of a municipal ordinance or franchise, such municipality shall be made a party, and shall be entitled to be heard, and if the statute, ordinance or franchise is alleged to be unconstitutional, the attorney general shall also be served with a copy of the proceeding and be entitled to be heard.
When declaratory relief is sought, all persons shall be made parties who have or claim any interest which would be affected by the declaration, and no declaration shall prejudice the rights of persons not parties to the proceeding. In any proceeding which involves the validity of a municipal ordinance or franchise, such municipality shall be made a party, and shall be entitled to be heard, and if the statute, ordinance or franchise is alleged to be unconstitutional, the attorney general shall also be served with a copy of the proceeding and be entitled to be heard.
When a proceeding under this chapter involves the determination of an issue of fact, such issue may be tried and determined in the same manner as issues of fact are tried and determined in other civil actions, in the court in which the proceeding is pending.
The several sections and provisions of this chapter, except RCW 7.24.010 and 7.24.020, are hereby declared independent and severable, and the invalidity, if any, of any part or feature thereof shall not affect or render the remainder of the chapter invalid or inoperative.
The court may refuse to render or enter a declaratory judgment or decree where such judgment or decree, if rendered or entered, would not terminate the uncertainty or controversy giving rise to the proceeding.
The court, in its discretion and upon such conditions and with or without such bond or other security as it deems necessary and proper, may stay any ruling, order, or any court proceedings prior to final judgment or decree and may restrain all parties involved in order to secure the benefits and preserve and protect the rights of all parties to the court proceedings.
An action or proceeding shall not be open to objection on the ground that a declaratory judgment or decree is prayed for. The declaration may be either affirmative or negative in form and effect; and such declarations shall have the force and effect of a final judgment or decree. [ 1937 c 14 § 1; 1935 c 113 § 1; RRS § 784-1.]
If the attorney general issues a written opinion concluding that a violation has occurred, the public entity has seven days after the opinion is issued, regardless of whether a civil action is filed, to disclose the record. N.D.C.C. § 44-04-21.1 (2). If the public entity fails to disclose the record within the seven-day period and the person requesting the opinion prevails in a civil action brought under N.D.C.C. § 44-04-21.2, the requestor must be awarded costs, disbursements, and reasonable attorney’s fees in the action and on appeal. Id. The consequences for failing to comply with an attorney general’s opinion also include potential personal liability for the person or persons responsible for the noncompliance. Id.
Idaho Code § 74-116 (2) provides that, in any action to enforce the provisions of the Act, a “court shall award reasonable costs and attorney fees to the prevailing party or parties, if it finds that the request or refusal to provide records was frivolously pursued.” In addition, the Act provides that a court may assess a civil penalty of up to $1,000 against any public official who it finds “has deliberately and in bad faith improperly refused a legitimate request for inspection or copying.” Idaho Code § 74-117.
Noncompliance with a public records request can result in a public body being required to pay the reasonable attorney fees of the requestor in a court action. ORS 192.431 (3) requires the court to award reasonable attorney fees and costs to a requestor who prevails in a suit and allows the court to decide whether to award fees and costs (or a portion) if the requestor prevails in part.
47:1A-6). In addition, a public official, officer, employee or custodian who knowingly and willfully violates OPRA and is found to have unreasonably denied access under the totality of the circumstances, shall be subject to a civil penalty of $1,000 for an initial violation $2,500 for a second violation that occurs within 10 years of the initial violation, and $5,000 for a third violation occurring within 10 years of an initial violation that . Appropriate disciplinary proceedings may be initiated against a public official, officer, employee or custodian against whom a penalty has been imposed.
The Public Records Act provides no sanctions for noncompliance, but it does provide, in AS 40.25.125, for injunctive relief against anyone keeping you from getting public records: “A person having custody or control of a public record who denies, obstructs, or attempts to obstruct, or a person not having custody or control who aids or abets another person in denying, obstructing, or attempting to obstruct, the inspection of a public record subject to inspection under AS 40.25.110 or 40.25.120 may be enjoined by the superior court from denying, obstructing, or attempting to obstruct, the inspection of public records subject to inspection under AS 40.25.110 or 40.25.120. A person may seek injunctive relief under this section without exhausting the person's remedies under AS 40.25.123 - 40.25.124.” In exceptional cases, in addition to adverse publicity, other remedies such as recalls or criminal prosecution, or contempt citations for failure to abide by a court injunction or other order, are theoretically possible. See [Open Records] §V.D.10-.11, for discussion of certain other potentially applicable penalties, fines and sanctions. Traditionally, a significant deterrent against noncompliance had been that full attorney fees were available to the prevailing plaintiff in a public interest suit, which a suit asserting a right of public access to government information normally would be. However, in 2003, the Alaska Legislature largely eliminated the public interest litigant exception to the general rule in Alaska that prevailing parties can recover a portion of their fees from the other side. In 2007, the Alaska Supreme Court rejected legal challenges seeking to overturn this law, and in 2018 the Court said public interest litigants seeking access to records couldn’t avoid this result by claiming it was constitutional litigation. See generally, Open Records Guide, §IV.D.9 (a). Between the “loser pays” prevailing party fee rule applicable to all Alaska litigants, and elimination of the public interest exception, Alaska has become the only state that would presumptively impose fees and costs on news media and other public interest litigants who unsuccessfully pursue non-frivolous claims. This change has had and is likely to have a significant adverse effect on the press.
NRS 239.011. An officer who mutilates, destroys, conceals, erases, obliterates or falsifies any record or paper appertaining to his or her office, is guilty of a category C felony. NRS 239.310.
The CPRA does not provide for sanctions for an agency's noncompliance with its disclosure obligations. Reasonable attorneys' fees and costs are mandatory to the prevailing plaintiff under Section 6259 (d), however.
Private insurers address adverse selection in health insurance with medical underwriting and rescinding healthcare coverage if enrollees become sick due to pre-existing conditions. These rationing practices result in denying coverage to citizens with high healthcare risks. The increase in numbers of uncovered citizens with high risks increases the risk of uncompensated care. If providers of healthcare shift these costs to insurers in the form of higher prices, insurance premiums are likely to increase. Higher premiums result in increasing adverse selection, which in turn is counteracted with intensifying rationing practices. The resulting premium spiral is addressed by ObamaCare, that is, the governance structure that regulates healthcare in the United States.
If the penalty is not a tax, Vinson (#N#Reference Vinson#N#2011: 40) argues that ‘the Constitutionality of the individual mandate will turn on whether the failure to buy health insurance is “activity”’. The Commerce Clause gives Congress the power to regulate commercial activities (2010: 60).
Contract enforcement concerns two types of devises: probity enforcing and coercion-constraining institutions. With regard to the probity enforcing devises, Williamson (#N#Reference Williamson#N#1999) mentions discretionary power and stability of jobs as two components of contract enforcement. The coercion-constraining enforcement mechanisms or legalistic dispute settlements are related to the Constitution and Administrative Law. Related to ObamaCare, these devices concern different types of suits: firstly, the lawsuits concerning its constitutionality and, secondly, as of 2014, agencies have to face post-collection suit for refund if unexpected improper penalty levying may occur.