Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 389189_pub.pdf
- Citation
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 389189_pub.pdf
- Jurisdiction
- Washington (state)
- Source verification
- official_capture_completeness_unverified
- Original Source
- https://www.courts.wa.gov/opinions/pdf/389189_pub.pdf ↗
Related Parts of This Source
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 389189_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 389189_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 389189_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 389189_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 389189_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 389189_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 389189_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 389189_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 389189_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 389189_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 389189_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 389189_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 389189_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 389189_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 389189_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 389189_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 389189_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 389189_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 389189_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 389189_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 389189_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 389189_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 389189_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 389189_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 389189_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 389189_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 389189_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 389189_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 389189_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 389189_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 389189_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 389189_pub.pdf
Full Text
1,744 chars7 The Joint Statement is a policy statement, rather than an authoritative interpretation, but it has been recognized as persuasive authority. See, e.g., Bhogaita v. Altamonte Heights Condo. Ass’n, Inc., 765 F.3d 1277, 1286 n.3 (11th Cir. 2014); Sabal Palm Condos. of Pine Island Ridge Ass’n, Inc. v. Fischer, 6 F. Supp. 3d 1272, 1286 (S.D. Fla. 2014); Douglas v. Kriegsfeld Corp., 884 A.2d 1109, 1120, 1122 (D.C. Cir. 2005); Andover Hous. Auth. v. Shkolnik, 443 Mass. 300, 309 n.14, 820 N.E.2d 815 (2005); Kuhn v. McNary Estates Homeowners Ass’n., Inc., 228 F. Supp. 3d 1142, 1149 (D. Or. 2017). K&H does not disagree that the Joint Statement should be referenced as persuasive authority. See Br. of Resp’t at 45. 28 For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/. No. 38918-9-III Kiemle & Hagood Co. v. Daniels furnished medical records in which her physician described her as “markedly kyphotic” 8 along with noting several other physical impairments. Def.’s Ex. 2, at 2 (emphasis added). Moreover, multiple K&H employees testified they knew Ms. Daniels had problems with her back because she had told them as much. WLAD broadly defines “impairment" to include any “condition . . . affecting” an individual’s “musculoskeletal” system. RCW 49.60.040(7)(c)(i). And an “impairment” is a “disability” when it is “perceived to exist whether or not it exists in fact.” RCW 49.60.040(7)(a)(iii). Ms. Daniels’s back problems readily meet this definition, and K&H’s employees were aware of them. b. Necessity of tenant’s requested accommodation The trial court also concluded Ms. Daniels should have provided third-party verification of the connection between her disability and her requested accommodation.