Legal Opinion

Dickgieser v. State

Washington Supreme Court

Decided January 27, 2005No. 74619-2PublishedCited by 24 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

¶1

Madsen, J.

This case involves an inverse condemnation action by James, Milo, and Joan Dickgieser (the Dickgiesers) against the state of Washington for damage to the Dickgiesers’ property allegedly caused when the Department of Natural Resources (Department) logged or allowed logging on state forest lands located adjacent to the Dickgiesers’ land. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the Department, holding the Dickgiesers had failed to establish the “public use” element of their inverse condemnation claim. The Court of Appeals affirmed on the basis that the Department’s…

2Cases cited33 opinions

  1. Folsom v. Burger KingWashington Supreme Court · 1998
  2. Folsom v. Burger KingWashington Supreme Court · 1998
  3. Highline School District No. 401 v. Port of SeattleWashington Supreme Court · 1976
  4. Ackerman v. Port of SeattleWashington Supreme Court · 1960
  5. Miller v. City of TacomaWashington Supreme Court · 1963

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

3Cited by24 opinions

  1. Lakey v. Puget Sound Energy, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 2013
  2. Grundy v. Thurston CountyWashington Supreme Court · 2005
  3. Grundy v. Thurston CountyWashington Supreme Court · 2005
  4. HTK Management, L.L.C. v. Seattle Popular Monorail AuthorityWashington Supreme Court · 2005
  5. Htk Management v. Seattle Monorail Auth.Washington Supreme Court · 2005

19 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