Skip to main content
· 2/5/1910

Whitaker v. Clausen

Citations

  • 57 Wash. 268
  • 106 P. 745
  • 1910 Wash. LEXIS 738

Syllabus

<p>Pensions — Parties Entitled — Death oe Applicant Pending Application. Rem. & Bal. Code, § 8923, granting pay for services performed by the Indian war veterans is a gift in the nature of a pension, limited by its terms to the veteran in propria persona, and in case of his death pending his application, payment cannot be made’ to his heir or personal representative; since no provision is made therefor (Rudkin, C. J., dissenting).</p>

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that, because the MTCA “provides specific exclusions to its protections and requirements, ... each claim must be examined for MTCA application”
  • holding that sovereign immunity applies to claims alleging tortious interference with business relations because the tort requires proof of malice
  • holding that acts committed with malice or criminal intent are beyond the scope of employment for MTCA purposes
  • holding that acts committed with malice or criminal intent are beyond the scope of employment for MTCA purposes
  • holding that \conversion is an intentional tort arguably subject to the MTCA....\
  • “The MTCA does not apply to all claims against governmental entities,” thus “each claim must be examined for MTCA application.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Chadwick, Rudkin

Read full opinion on CourtListener

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.