Skip to main content

Cunningham v. State

Citations

  • 811 P.2d 225
  • 61 Wash. App. 562
  • 1991 Wash. App. LEXIS 198

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • holding that partial summary judgment was sufficiently final to invoke' collateral estoppel where judge issued a written opinion
  • holding that partial summary judgment was suffi- ciently final to invoke collateral estoppel where judge issued a written opinion
  • outlining factors relevant to whether a judgment is sufficiently final for purposes of issue preclusion
  • adopting the following test for finality: (i) whether the prior decision was adequately deliberated; (ii) whether it was firm, rather 17 than tentative; (iii) whether the parties were fully heard; (iv
  • adopting the following test for finality: (i) whether the prior decision was adequately deliberated; (ii) whether it was firm, rather 17 than tentative; (iii) whether the parties were fully heard; (iv) whether the court supported its decision with a reasoned opinion; and (v

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Agid

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

15 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

16 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.