Legal Opinion

Peralta v. State

Washington Supreme Court

Decided February 16, 2017No. 92675-1PublishedCited by 19 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWiggins, J.

¶1 We are asked to review the trial court’s ruling that plaintiff Deborah Peralta’s admission during pretrial discovery should be given conclusive effect. Peralta admitted without qualification to being “under the influence of intoxicating liquors” at the time she was struck and injured by a Washington State Patrol car. We hold that her admission in this context was unambiguous and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion when it ruled she was bound by her admission. The jury instruction incorporating this ruling was appropriate. Even if the meaning of Per-alta’s admission was…

2Cases cited26 opinions

  1. State v. LeachWashington Supreme Court · 1989
  2. Littlejohn v. TrammellCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2013
  3. 999, a Corporation, Plaintiff/appellee/cross-Appellant v. C.I.T. Corporation, a Corporation, Defendant/appellant/cross-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1985
  4. HomeStreet, Inc. v. STATE, DEPT. OF REVENUEWashington Supreme Court · 2009
  5. HomeStreet, Inc. v. Department of RevenueWashington Supreme Court · 2009

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

3Cited by19 opinions

  1. Gerlach v. The Cove Apartments, LLCWashington Supreme Court · 2020
  2. Badgley Mullins Turner, Pllc App./x-resp. v. Leslie Spencer & Tammy S., Blakey, Resp./x-app.Court of Appeals of Washington · 2018
  3. Gerlach v. Cove Apartments, LLCCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2019
  4. State v. KellerWashington Supreme Court · 2024
  5. Austin K. Fite, V. City Of PuyallupCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2022

14 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