Legal Opinion
French v. Uribe, Inc.
Court of Appeals of Washington
Decided January 19, 2006No. 22818-5-IIIPublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Runge, J.*
¶1 Generally, Washington’s Industrial Insurance Act (Act), Title 51 RCW, precludes employee recovery beyond the compensation provided for in the Act. However, RCW 51.04.010 allows tort recovery if the employer deliberately intended to injure the employee. While working for Uribe, Inc., William Meier was killed and Jack French was permanently injured as the result of an electrical accident. Mr. French and Tina Meier filed this action seeking recovery outside of the Act. The trial court denied Uribe, Inc.’s, motion for summary judgment, concluding (1) the evidence was sufficient to…
2Cases cited26 opinions
- Hartley v. StateWashington Supreme Court · 1985
- Gardner v. Loomis Armored, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 1996
- Vallandigham v. Clover Park School District No. 400Washington Supreme Court · 2005
- Vallandigham v. CLOVER PARK SCHOOL DIST.Washington Supreme Court · 2005
- Morris v. McNicolWashington Supreme Court · 1974
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Walston v. Boeing Co.Court of Appeals of Washington · 2013
- Rasmussen v. STATE FARM MUT. AUTO. INS.Nebraska Supreme Court · 2009
- French v. Uribe, Inc.Court of Appeals of Washington · 2006
- French v. Uribe, Inc.Court of Appeals of Washington · 2006
- Janice Brinson-Wagner v. Kennewick School DistrictCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2020