Lian v. Stalick, 106 Wash. App. 811 (2001)

Citation: Lian v. Stalick, 106 Wash. App. 811 (2001)
Parent Document: Lian v. Stalick, 106 Wash. App. 811 (2001)
Jurisdiction: Washington (state)
Effective Date: 2001-06-19
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/4931615/lian-v-stalick/ ↗

Full Text

652 chars

The trial court did not clearly address Degel in its written findings. Before Dexheimer, that would have been superfluous because it is unnecessary to enter cumulative or alternative liability findings. But, the trial court did state in its oral opinion that the steps “are not in compliance with any measure of safety, whatsoever.” RP at 173. The court further noted the steps were not only visibly decrepit for all to see, but that Mr. Stalick failed “to at least have some modicum of safety.” RP at 176. “I find that these steps are inherently dangerous and do violate the code; that they interfered with the safe habitation of the home.” RP at 176.

Other Sections in This Document (99)

Full Text