Higher Education Facilities Authority v. Gardner
Washington Supreme Court
1DissentGoodloe, J.
(dissenting) — Because I believe that Const. art. 1, § 11 (amend. 34) and Const. art. 8, § 5 are violated by this legislative scheme, I respectfully dissent.
Const. art. 1, § 11 (amend. 34)
Admittedly, State Health Care Facilities Auth. v. Spellman, 96 Wn.2d 68, 633 P.2d 866 (1981) addressed an article 1, section 11 challenge to a similar legislative scheme and found the legislation not to be constitutionally infirm. Spellman carefully, and I believe correctly, answered the "money" component of article 1, section 11. However, it gives short shrift to the "property" component.
I believe Spellman…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- In Re the Marriage of JohnsonWashington Supreme Court · 1981
- York v. StoneWashington Supreme Court · 1934
- Washington State Housing Finance Commission v. O'BrienWashington Supreme Court · 1983
- Washington Health Care Facilities Authority v. RayWashington Supreme Court · 1980
- Washington Health Care Facilities Authority v. SpellmanWashington Supreme Court · 1981
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.