Legal Opinion
Kelly v. State
Court of Appeals of Washington
Decided April 17, 2008No. Nos. 25952-8-III; 25953-6-III; 25954-4-III; 25955-2-IIIPublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtSweeney, J.
¶1 The application of the doctrine of equitable estoppel must be based on findings that support each of the doctrine’s required elements. And in this appeal from an administrative ruling, the findings at issue are those of the administrative law judge. Here, there are no findings or conclusions that would support the application of equitable estoppel against the State. And we, therefore, reverse the superior court’s conclusion to the contrary.
*94FACTS
¶2 Hugh and Deborah Kelly adopted Samantha, Michael, Shad, and Courtney Kelly between 1994 and 1999. Each of the children has severe disabilities.
¶3…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Kramarevcky v. Department of Social & Health ServicesWashington Supreme Court · 1993
- Niemann v. Vaughn Community ChurchWashington Supreme Court · 2005
- Niemann v. Vaughn Community ChurchWashington Supreme Court · 2005
- Campbell v. State, Department of Social and Health ServicesWashington Supreme Court · 2004
- St. Francis Extended Health Care v. Department of Social & Health ServicesWashington Supreme Court · 1990
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Markam Group, Inc. v. Employment Security DepartmentCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2009
- Markam Group, Inc. v. State, Dept. of Emp. SEC.Court of Appeals of Washington · 2009