Legal Opinion

Kightlinger v. Public Utility District No. 1

Court of Appeals of Washington

Decided December 16, 2003No. 29296-3-IIPublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtArmstrong, J.

Garth Kightlinger1 and several other Clark County taxpayers (the Taxpayers) sued Public Utility District No. 1 of Clark County (PUD), alleging that the PUD lacked statutory authority to engage in the business of repairing appliances other than those it sells or leases. Both parties moved for summary judgment; the trial court granted the Taxpayers’ motion. On appeal, the PUD contends it has implied authority to operate the repair business. In addition, it argues there is no justiciable controversy, the Taxpayers lack standing to challenge PUD’s longtime repair business, and laches bars the…

2Cases cited30 opinions

  1. Wilson v. SteinbachWashington Supreme Court · 1982
  2. Haberman v. Washington Public Power Supply SystemWashington Supreme Court · 1988
  3. Amalgamated Transit Union Local 587 v. StateWashington Supreme Court · 2000
  4. Diversified Industries Development Corp. v. RipleyWashington Supreme Court · 1973
  5. Buell v. City of BremertonWashington Supreme Court · 1972

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

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Bercier v. KigaCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2004
  2. Bercier v. KigaCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2004
  3. Kightlinger v. Public Utility Dist. No. 1Court of Appeals of Washington · 2003
  4. Eugster v. City of SpokaneCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2007
  5. Okeson v. City of SeattleWashington Supreme Court · 2007

6 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