Goldmark v. McKenna
Washington Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtC. Johnson, J.
¶1 In this original action brought in this court, Commissioner of Public Lands Peter Goldmark seeks a writ of mandamus to compel Attorney General Robert McKenna to pursue an appeal from a trial court decision in a condemnation action. Although McKenna provided representation at the trial court, he refused to pursue the appeal based on his evaluation of the merits of the case.
¶2 The attorney general is a constitutionally recognized office that acts as the attorney for state officers and performs other duties “prescribed by law.” Const, art. Ill, § 21. The legislature has delineated what those…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Waste Management of Seattle, Inc. v. Utilities & Transportation CommissionWashington Supreme Court · 1994
- State v. KrallWashington Supreme Court · 1994
- People Ex Rel. Deukmejian v. BrownCalifornia Supreme Court · 1981
- Manchin v. BrowningWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1982
- Berge v. GortonWashington Supreme Court · 1977
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by28 opinions
- Washburn ex rel. Estate of Roznowski v. City of Federal WayWashington Supreme Court · 2013
- Davis v. CoxWashington Supreme Court · 2015
- Wright v. DAVE JOHNSON INS. INC.Court of Appeals of Washington · 2012
- Utter v. Building Industry Ass'nWashington Supreme Court · 2015
- City of Seattle v. McKennaWashington Supreme Court · 2011
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.