Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 952370.pdf

Citation: Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 952370.pdf
Jurisdiction: Washington (state)
Source verification: official_capture_completeness_unverified
Original Source: https://www.courts.wa.gov/opinions/pdf/952370.pdf ↗

Related Parts of This Source

Full Text

1,646 chars

556, 561, 807 P.2d 353(1991)(an "ordinance may also violate Const, art. 11, § 11

if it directly and irreconcilably conflicts with the statute"(citing Kennedy v. City of

Seattle, 94 Wn.2d 376, 383-84, 617 P.2d 713 (1980))). We agree.

11
For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.
Southwick, Inc. v. Wash. State Funeral & Cemetery Bd,No. 95237-0

Southwick argues that the Court of Appeals' interpretation ofRCW

68.50.140 threatens to undermine the efficacy of cemetery-issued rules across the

state.^ It also argues that the court's interpretation "emasculates"—or, in our

words,"disempowers"—^the trifecta of statutes allowing cemeteries to create,

implement, and enforce these rules. However,the opposite seems true—

Southwick's position undermines the efficacy of Washington's disinterment

statutes. Southwick argues the legislature has granted cemeteries authority

independent of other statutes, but this is not so. Through RCW 68.20.060, the

legislature permits cemeteries to adopt and enforce internal rules and regulations

consistent with, not independent of, state law. Importantly, nowhere under the

statutory scheme is the express notice requirement established under RCW

68.50.220 excused.

As the Department points out, if cemetery rules superseded state statutes,

cemeteries could adopt rules exempting themselves from every statute governing

cemetery operations, such as the statute prohibiting cemeteries from refusing to

bury a nonwhite person. RCW 68.50.035. Nothing in RCW 68.20.060 or 68.24.110

acts to relieve cemetery authorities ofthe obligation to comply with state law.