Legal Opinion · Dissent

SEIU Healthcare 775NW v. Gregoire

Washington Supreme Court

Decided April 8, 2010No. 82551-3Published

1DissentMadsen, C.J.

¶23 (dissenting) — The majority says that mandatory inclusion of one item in a proposed budget requires the governor to exercise discretion in reducing or eliminating other requests, and therefore mandamus is improper. There is, of course, a fixed amount of funding available to achieve a balanced budget, and one budget request included in a proposed budget means that there is less money remaining for other proposed requests. But this fact does not turn a mandatory duty into a discretionary one. Pursuant to a state law duly enacted by the legislature, the governor had a mandatory duty to…

2Cases cited26 opinions

  1. Dicomes v. StateWashington Supreme Court · 1989
  2. Whatcom County v. City of BellinghamWashington Supreme Court · 1996
  3. Walker v. MunroWashington Supreme Court · 1994
  4. State v. KrallWashington Supreme Court · 1994
  5. Carrick v. LockeWashington Supreme Court · 1994

21 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