Arzola v. Name Intelligence, Inc.
Court of Appeals of Washington
1Opinion of the CourtTkickey, J.
¶1 Where a party has voluntarily satisfied a trial court decision that the appellate court later modifies, RAP 12.8 requires the trial court to order restitution in appropriate circumstances. Here, the defendants appealed a judgment that awarded the plaintiffs damages *591for nonpayment of wages. This court modified that judgment, determining that the compensation paid plaintiffs did not constitute wages. Thus, the defendants were entitled to recover the monies they had paid for exemplary damages, attorney fees, and litigation expenses. Defendants were also entitled to prejudgment interest…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited18 opinions
- In re the Marriage of LittlefieldWashington Supreme Court · 1997
- In Re Marriage of LittlefieldWashington Supreme Court · 1997
- Jones v. BestWashington Supreme Court · 1998
- Jones v. BestWashington Supreme Court · 1998
- Simonson v. FendellWashington Supreme Court · 1984
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Mutual Of Enumclaw, App./cross-res v. Myong Suk Day, Res/cross-appellantCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2017
- Estate Of: Randall J. Langeland. Janell Boone, App. / X-res. v. Sharon Drown, Res. / X-app.Court of Appeals of Washington · 2016
- IBEW Health & Welfare Trust Of Sw Wa, V Donald RutherfordCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2016
- Mutual Of Enumclaw, App./cross-res v. Myong Suk Day, Res/cross-appellantCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2016
- State Of Washington, V Michael A. HechtCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2018
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.