Legal Opinion

Kappelman v. Lutz

Court of Appeals of Washington

Decided November 6, 2007No. 24981-6-IIIPublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSweeney, C.J.

¶1 The decision by a trial judge to exclude evidence is a decision vested in the discretion of the trial judge, not us. And we will overturn that decision only when we conclude that the trial judge has abused his or her discretion by refusing to admit the evidence. Here, the *583judge refused to admit evidence that the operator of a motorcycle did not have the proper endorsement to carry a passenger or drive at night. We are unable to conclude that the trial judge abused his discretion by refusing to admit evidence that the defendant was not properly licensed. We therefore affirm the jury’s…

Also in this document: Concurrence.

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Brown v. Spokane County Fire Protection District No. 1Washington Supreme Court · 1983
  2. Weyerhaeuser v. Pierce CountyWashington Supreme Court · 1994
  3. City of Kennewick v. DayWashington Supreme Court · 2000
  4. Sandberg v. SpoelstraWashington Supreme Court · 1955
  5. Warren v. HartWashington Supreme Court · 1967

13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Kappelman v. LutzWashington Supreme Court · 2009
  2. Veridian Credit Union v. Eddie Bauer, LLCDistrict Court, W.D. Washington · 2017
  3. Kappelman v. LutzWashington Supreme Court · 2009
  4. Collins v. Clark County Fire District No. 5Court of Appeals of Washington · 2010
  5. Schmidt v. CooganWashington Supreme Court · 2014

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API