Legal Opinion

In Re the Recall of Lindquist

Washington Supreme Court

Decided July 21, 2011No. 85361-4PublishedCited by 31 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtFairhurst, J.

¶1 — Petitioners Albert O. Ugás and Daniel B. Fishburn filed a recall petition against respondent Pierce County Prosecuting Attorney Mark Lindquist, charging him with (1) misfeasance and/or malfeasance and breach of his oath of office for failing to investigate alleged corruption and falsification of records by former Pierce County Assessor-*124Treasurer Ken Madsen and (2) obstruction of justice for deterring law enforcement from investigating Madsen. After dismissing petitioners’ affidavit of prejudice, Judge James Cayce held the recall petition to be legally and factually insufficient and…

2Cases cited25 opinions

  1. Chuong Van Pham v. City of SeattleWashington Supreme Court · 2007
  2. Chuong Van Pham v. Seattle City LightWashington Supreme Court · 2007
  3. State v. RoweWashington Supreme Court · 1980
  4. Matter of Pearsall-StipekWashington Supreme Court · 1998
  5. Donaldson v. GreenwoodWashington Supreme Court · 1952

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

3Cited by31 opinions

  1. In re Recall of InsleeWashington Supreme Court · 2019
  2. Godfrey v. Ste. Michelle Wine Estates, Ltd.Washington Supreme Court · 2019
  3. In re the Recall of PiperWashington Supreme Court · 2015
  4. In re 2010 Denver County Grand JuryColorado Court of Appeals · 2012
  5. In re the Marriage of LeeCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2013

26 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