From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Bearden v. McGill

Supreme Court of Washington.
Sep 28, 2016
380 P.3d 489 (Wash. 2016)

Opinion

No. 93178–0

09-28-2016

James Bearden, Petitioner, v. Dolphus McGill, Respondent.


ORDER

¶1 Department I of the Court, composed of Chief Justice Madsen and Justices Johnson, Fairhurst, Wiggins, and Gordon McCloud, considered at its September 27, 2016, Motion Calendar whether review should be granted pursuant to RAP 13.4(b) and unanimously agreed that the following order be entered.

¶2 IT IS ORDERED:

¶3 That the Petition for Review is granted and the case is remanded to the Court of Appeals Division One for reconsideration in light of Jess Nelson v. Michael Erickson, et ux ., Supreme Court No. 92489–9. The Respondent's motion to strike portions of the appendices to the petition for review is denied as moot.

For the Court

/s/ Madsen, C.J.

CHIEF JUSTICE


Summaries of

Bearden v. McGill

Supreme Court of Washington.
Sep 28, 2016
380 P.3d 489 (Wash. 2016)
Case details for

Bearden v. McGill

Case Details

Full title:James Bearden, Petitioner, v. Dolphus McGill, Respondent.

Court:Supreme Court of Washington.

Date published: Sep 28, 2016

Citations

380 P.3d 489 (Wash. 2016)
186 Wash. 2d 1009
186 Wn. 2d 1009

Citing Cases

Bearden v. McGill

Bearden v. McGill , 193 Wash. App. 235, 253, 372 P.3d 138 (2016) ( Bearden I ). This court granted review and…