From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Kittitas Cnty. v. Allphin

Supreme Court of Washington.
Jan 4, 2017
187 Wn. 2d 1001 (Wash. 2017)

Opinion

No. 93562-9

01-04-2017

Kittitas County, Respondent, v. Sky Allphin, et al., Petitioners.


ORDER

¶1 Department II of the Court, composed of Chief Justice Madsen and Justices Owens, Stephens, González and Yu, considered at its January 3, 2017, 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 only as to the issue of whether emails exchanged between county prosecuting attorneys and Department of Ecology employees relating to the Chem-Safe NOVA litigation are exempt from public records production as attorney work product under the "common interest doctrine." Any party may serve and file a supplemental brief within 30 days of the date of this order, see RAP 13.7(d).

For the Court

/s/ Madsen, C.J.

CHIEF JUSTICE


Summaries of

Kittitas Cnty. v. Allphin

Supreme Court of Washington.
Jan 4, 2017
187 Wn. 2d 1001 (Wash. 2017)
Case details for

Kittitas Cnty. v. Allphin

Case Details

Full title:Kittitas County, Respondent, v. Sky Allphin, et al., Petitioners.

Court:Supreme Court of Washington.

Date published: Jan 4, 2017

Citations

187 Wn. 2d 1001 (Wash. 2017)
187 Wn. 2d 1001
187 Wash. 2d 1001

Citing Cases

Kittitas Cnty. v. Sky Allphin

Mr. Allphin petitioned the Supreme Court for review. The court granted review only as to the issue of…

Kittitas Cnty. v. Allphin

Mr. Allphin sought discretionary review, which our Supreme Court granted "only as to the issue of whether the…