Legal Opinion
City of Seattle v. McCoy
Court of Appeals of Washington
Decided April 1, 2002No. 48578-4-IPublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtAgid, C.J.
The City of Seattle appeals from an order granting attorney fees and costs to Wilmer Morgan and Gwen Dixon.1 The trial court granted respondents’ motion for attorney fees and costs under Washington’s eminent domain statute, RCW 8.25.075, following this court’s decision in City of Seattle v. McCoy (McCoy I).2 McCoy I involved a drug nuisance abatement action the City filed against Oscar and Barbara McCoy, Morgan and Dixon, and real property owned by Morgan and Dixon. This court held that application of the drug nuisance statute to the McCoys “constitute [d] a taking of property without…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Dayton v. Farmers Insurance GroupWashington Supreme Court · 1994
- Harmon v. Department of Social & Health ServicesWashington Supreme Court · 1998
- Harmon v. DEPT. OF SOCIAL & HEALTH SERV.Washington Supreme Court · 1998
- Daviscourt v. PeistrupCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1985
- Brazil v. City of AuburnWashington Supreme Court · 1980
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Kennedy v. MartinCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2003
- Kennedy v. MartinCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2003
- City of Seattle v. McCoyCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2002
- City of Seattle v. McCoyCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2002