Cobb v. Snohomish County
Court of Appeals of Washington
1Opinion of the CourtWebster, J.
The doctrine of avoidable consequences prevents an injured party from recovering damages it could have avoided through reasonable efforts. Snohomish County denied R/L Associates’s application for preliminary plat approval based on an interpretation of the County’s road ordinance that this court found to be arbitrary and capricious. See Cobb v. Snohomish County, 64 Wn. App. 451, 829 P.2d 169 (1991). Because the trial court, on remand for damages, found that a reasonable developer in R/L’s position would have paid the County $10,000 under protest to allow its development plans to go forward…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Gates v. DeukmejianCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1992
- Bowers v. Transamerica Title InsuranceWashington Supreme Court · 1983
- Parks v. WatsonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1983
- Fisher Properties, Inc. v. Arden-Mayfair, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 1990
- Robert G. Fleming v. County of Kane, State of Illinois, and Nabi R. FakroddinCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1990
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by22 opinions
- Labriola v. Pollard Group, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 2004
- Labriola v. Pollard Group, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 2004
- Christensen v. Royal School Dist. No. 160Washington Supreme Court · 2005
- Bell v. StateWashington Supreme Court · 2002
- Bell v. StateWashington Supreme Court · 2002
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.