Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 43636-1-II Published Opinion.pdf

Citation: Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 43636-1-II Published Opinion.pdf
Jurisdiction: Washington (state)
Source verification: official_capture_completeness_unverified
Original Source: https://www.courts.wa.gov/opinions/pdf/D2%2043636-1-II%20%20Published%20Opinion.pdf ↗

Related Parts of This Source

Full Text

1,766 chars

32
Dellen also argues for the first time in its reply brief that ( 1) it is entitled to an immediate
refund of its surety as a matter of equity; and ( 2) under WAC 296 -15- 121( 9), it is " entitled" to a
refund in May 2015 because an employer is entitled to such a refund at least ten years after
release from monthly reporting requirements. Reply Br. of Appellant at 14. We do not address
arguments raised for the first time in reply briefs. RAP 10. 3( c); Cowiche Canyon Conservancy

v. Bosley, 118 Wn.2d 801, 809, 828 P. 2d 549 ( 1992).

21
             

No. 43636- 1- 11

Dellen asserts that the Department violated its right to due process by failing to give notice that it

had forfeited its entire surety fund and failing to provide a meaningful hearing " at a meaningful

time." Br. of Appellant at 27 ( citations omitted). Again, this argument fails.

Constitutional issues are issues of law, which we review de novo. State v. Blilie, 132

Wn.2d 484, 489, 939 P. 2d 691 ( 1997). The due process clause of the Washington Constitution

provides that "[ n] o person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of

law." WASH CONST. art. I, § 3. Procedural due process refers to the procedures that the

government must follow before it deprives a person of life, liberty, or property. See Nieshe v.

Concrete Sch. Dist., 129 Wn. App. 632, 640, 127 P. 3d 713 ( 2005). "` When a state seeks to

deprive a person of a protected interest, procedural due process requires that an individual

receive notice of the deprivation and an opportunity to be heard to guard against erroneous

deprivation. "' Speelman v. Bellingham /Whatcom County Hous. Authorities, 167 Wn. App. 624,