Eggleston v. Pierce County
Washington Supreme Court
148 Wash. 2d 760 (2003)

- Written by Katrina Sumner, JD
Facts
In October 1995, sheriffs employed by Pierce County (defendant) served a search warrant on the home of Linda Eggleston (plaintiff). The search warrant related to Linda’s adult son, Brian, who lived with her and was dealing drugs. Officers served the warrant and charged Brian with murder, several drug offenses, and assault. That day, homicide investigators searched Linda’s home and found drugs, drug paraphernalia, weapons, and money. There was no indication that Linda was involved in or responsible for her son’s crimes. An officer transported Linda to her mother’s mobile home that evening. In April 1996, a trial court issued a search warrant, allowing any evidence of murder to be seized from Linda’s home. This time, officers seized two walls from Linda’s home, one of which was load-bearing. Linda’s house was left unstable and uninhabitable. Two months after this seizure, the trial court issued an order requiring the home to be completely preserved in its current condition. Linda abided by the court’s order and continued living with and paying rent to her mother. In Brian’s first trial, a jury judged him guilty of the charges relating to drugs and assault but was deadlocked regarding the murder charge. At a subsequent trial, the jury found Brian guilty of second-degree murder. Although both juries went to Linda’s house to view the crime scene, the removed walls were not utilized as evidence in Brian’s trials. On appeal, an appellate court reversed Brian’s convictions for murder and assault and remanded Brian’s case for a new trial. For this reason, the order requiring the home to remain in its current condition would remain in effect until Brian’s third criminal trial was completed if the order was not vacated or modified beforehand. Thus, in 1998 Linda submitted a damages claim to Pierce County, but her claim was rejected. Then Linda filed suit in state and federal court on multiple theories, including that the loss of her property was a compensable taking under Washington’s constitution. Linda’s federal claims were stayed while her state claim was adjudicated in state court. Linda and Pierce County both moved for summary judgment, which a trial court granted for Pierce County. The Washington Supreme Court granted review.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Chambers, J.)
Dissent (Sanders, J.)
Dissent (Alexander, C.J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.