Peralta v. State
Washington Supreme Court
389 P.3d 596 (2017)
- Written by Sean Carroll, JD
Facts
Deborah Peralta (plaintiff) was injured when she was hit by a Washington State Patrol car. Peralta sued the State of Washington (defendant) to recover for her injuries. In the state’s response to the complaint, it notified Peralta of its intent to use Washington’s intoxication-defense statute as an affirmative defense. During discovery, the state sent Peralta a request for admission asking her to admit or deny that she was intoxicated at the time of the accident. The request mirrored the language of the intoxication-defense statute. Peralta responded by admitting that she was intoxicated. At trial, the trial court granted the state’s motion to give Peralta’s admission conclusive effect. The jury then found that this intoxication was the proximate cause of Peralta’s injuries, and the trial court dismissed the complaint. Peralta appealed, arguing that although she may have been intoxicated, she was intoxicated to a lesser degree than the intoxication-defense statute required.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Wiggins, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 820,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 989 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.
