acted with "authority of law" when it moved the urn garden because a different
statute in that title grants it police powers to enforce its own rules and regulations
and "the ordinances of the city and county" (remember, Southwick moved the
cremains to comply with the City's assertion of its property right). That statute,
RCW 68.56.060, gives the cemetery
the authority of a police officer for the purpose of maintaining order,
enforcing the rules and regulations of the cemetery association, the
laws of the state, and the ordinances of the city or county, within the
cemetery over which he or she has charge, and within such radius as
may be necessary to protect the cemetery property.
For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.
Southwick, Inc. v. Dep't ofLicensing Bus. & Professions Div.,^o. 95237-0
(Gordon McCloud, J., dissenting)
(Emphasis added.) Southwick argues that its own rules specifically reserve to it "the
right to correct errors made by it in making interments, disinterments or removals,"
so it had "the right to remove and reinter the remains in the property" under this
police-powers statute. Appellant Southwick, Inc.'s Pet. for Review at 5-6 (quoting
Admin. Record(AR)at 163). Southwick also asserts that it had "authority of law"
to move the urn garden because the City demanded access to its easement for critical
public health purposes—a demand premised on a lawful property right. Appellant
Southwick's Opening Br. at 15 (citing AR at 163).
The majority disagrees. In the absence of a resident definition of "without
authority of law," it argues that a different statute requires Southwick to notify the
decedent's next ofkin when his or her cremains are moved, so that other statute—in