Ralph v. State of Washington Dep't of Natural Resources, No. 88115-4 (Dec. 31, 2014), is a Washington-specific case because it involves the Washington Supreme Court's view of a state statute governing where lawsuits "for any injuries to real property" "shall be commenced." But since one of the claims brought by the plaintiff for flooding he alleged was caused by the State's poor forestry practices was for inverse condemnation -- and many states have similar statutes -- we thought we'd give you a heads-up on the decision.
Ralph's land in Lewis County was flooded when "heavy rains caused the Chehalis River to overflow its banks." He asserted the DNR's had "made its land unstable, which allowed landslides to form and debris to flow into the Chehalis River, which in turn displaced river water, flooded the river basin, and caused damage to [his] property." Slip op. at 3. He filed suit in King County.
The trial court, applying a long-standing Washington precedent holding that the above-quoted statute's requirements are "jurisdictional," dismissed the case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The court of appeals agreed.
The Supreme Court revisited the "[c]ase law from the 1940s and 1950s" which had labeled the wrong-county problem as jurisdictional, overruled those decisions, and held instead that the statute merely relates to venue. Thus, the trial court should have transferred the case to the right county, not dismissed.
The trial courts of Washington are courts of general jurisdiction, and where the lawsuit is commenced is but a question of the most appropriate forum, not an issue of the court's judicial power. Seems about right to us, even though four justices dissented because filing in the wrong county does not automatically give notice "to anyone who consults the county records that the lawsuit is pending."
The big question, however, was answered neither by the majority nor the dissent: why did Ralph file the case in King County, which isn't even adjacent, but two counties away from Lewis County? Because the negligence or omissions of which he complained occured in King County? Are there more favorable juries in King County? Was this a test case (in 2011, the court suggested it might need to reconsider its earlier jurisdiction vs venue rule)? Something else?
Ralph v. State of Washington Dep't of Natural Resources, No. 88115-4 (Wash. Dec. 31, 2014)
