Legal Opinion
Smith v. State
Court of Appeals of Washington
Decided September 18, 2006No. 55388-7-IPublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtGrosse, J.
¶1 A duty of care may arise where a public official charged with the responsibility to provide accurate information fails to correctly answer a specific inquiry from a plaintiff intended to benefit from the dissemination of the information. Here, in response to a specific inquiry, officials from the Department of Social and Health Services (DSHS) allegedly conveyed to Lynn Smith inaccurate information about Lynn Smith’s appeal rights regarding her application for adoption assistance benefits, information she allegedly relied on to her and her infant child’s detriment. Because the Smiths have…
2Cases cited30 opinions
- Will v. Michigan Department of State PoliceSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Parratt v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Hafer v. MeloSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
- Gonzaga University v. DoeSupreme Court of the United States · 2002
- Alexander v. SandovalSupreme Court of the United States · 2001
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Munich v. Skagit Emergency Communications CenterWashington Supreme Court · 2012
- Janaszak v. StateCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2013
- Munich v. SKAGIT EMERG. COMMUNICATIONS CTR.Court of Appeals of Washington · 2011
- Munich v. Skagit Emergency Communications CenterCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2011
- Joseph Janaszak, Dds v. State Of WashingtonCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2013
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.