Caulfield v. Kitsap County
Court of Appeals of Washington
1Opinion of the CourtBridgewater, J.
Kitsap County appeals a judgment against it for negligence in the management of Jay Caulfield’s in-home care resulting in severe personal injuries. The County contends that the public duty doctrine applied and it was immune from suit. We hold that when the County undertook in-home care management for Caulfield, who was already a profoundly disabled, vulnerable adult with multiple sclerosis, a special relationship exception to the public duty doctrine applied. The County also contends the trial court erred by improperly admitting evidence under ER 904 and by denying its motion for a new trial…
2Cases cited41 opinions
- Hartley v. StateWashington Supreme Court · 1985
- Petersen v. StateWashington Supreme Court · 1983
- Taggart v. StateWashington Supreme Court · 1992
- King v. City of SeattleWashington Supreme Court · 1974
- Taylor v. Stevens CountyWashington Supreme Court · 1988
36 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by26 opinions
- Winegar v. Froerer Corp.Utah Supreme Court · 1991
- Gregoire v. City of Oak HarborWashington Supreme Court · 2010
- Gregoire v. City of Oak HarborWashington Supreme Court · 2010
- H.B.H. v. StateWashington Supreme Court · 2018
- Donohoe v. StateCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2006
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.