Legal Opinion

Van Blaricom v. Kronenberg

Court of Appeals of Washington

Decided July 15, 2002No. 47666-1-IPublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtSchindler, J.

This case raises the issue of whether an attorney who uses RCW 6.25.070(2) to obtain a prejudgment writ of attachment on real property without prior notice or hearing and in the absence of exigent circumstances may be liable under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. We hold there may be such liability.

Attorney Donald Kronenberg represented Theresa Obermiller in a lawsuit against Donald Van Blaricom alleging he had assaulted her when she was a teenager.1 Shortly after he filed the suit, Kronenberg obtained ex parte prejudgment writs of attachment on the Van Blaricoms’ property. These writs were discharged…

2Cases cited23 opinions

  1. Mathews v. EldridgeSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  2. Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1950
  3. Lugar v. Edmondson Oil Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1982
  4. Fuentes v. ShevinSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  5. Sniadach v. Family Finance Corp. of Bay ViewSupreme Court of the United States · 1969

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Van Blaricom v. KronenbergCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2002

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API