Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Osborn v. Grant County

Washington Supreme Court

Decided November 27, 1996No. 63161-1Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partSanders, J.

(concurring in part, dissenting in part) — I concur with the majority except insofar as it disallows an award of reasonable attorney’s fees for litigation from public funds to the special prosecutor. In Washington, before the appointment of a special prosecutor can be justified, the county prosecutor "must have both a duty to represent an official and a disability that prevents the prosecutor from representing the official.” Westerman v. Cary, 125 Wn.2d 277, 298, 885 P.2d 827, 892 P.2d 1067 (1994); RCW 36.27.030. The majority holds that while the county prosecutor in this case was indeed…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Hearst Corp. v. HoppeWashington Supreme Court · 1978
  2. Westerman v. CaryWashington Supreme Court · 1995
  3. Bour v. JohnsonWashington Supreme Court · 1993
  4. In Re LewisWashington Supreme Court · 1957
  5. Fuqua v. FuquaWashington Supreme Court · 1977

8 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