§ 1983

Citation: § 1983
Parent Document: State v. City of Sunnyside (2024)
Jurisdiction: Washington (state)
Effective Date: 2024-06-20
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/9600119/state-v-city-of-sunnyside/ ↗

Full Text

1,045 chars

17
            Below, the respondents also argued Dr. Tippett’s expert report should not be admitted
because her reliance on 2010 census data and broad consideration of CFRHP enforcement
“incidents” made her opinion unreliable and irrelevant. 1 CP at 368-69. The State defended the
reliability of Dr. Tippett’s information sources and countered that the respondents’ arguments
largely go to the weight a fact finder should accord to the expert opinion rather than its
admissibility. In their briefing before this court, the respondents claim they “articulated the
deficiencies regarding those opinions and the trial court correctly agreed.” Resp’ts’ Br. at 74.
They included no argument or citation to authority in support and, as discussed supra note 9, the
trial court did not exclude the report. 2 CP at 852; see RAP 10.3(a)(6) (briefs should contain
argument with citations to legal authority). We therefore decline to address any admissibility
                                              38
State v. City of Sunnyside et al.
No. 101205-5

Other Sections in This Document (941)

Full Text