Legal Case Summary

Sarmiento v. King County


Date Argued: Mon Sep 08 2003
Case Number: 02-35453
Docket Number: 7861164
Judges:Thompson, Hawkins, Berzon
Duration: 19 minutes
Court Name: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Case Summary

**Case Summary: Sarmiento v. King County, Docket No. 7861164** **Court:** [Court Name] **Date:** [Date of Decision] **Jurisdiction:** King County, Washington **Parties:** - **Plaintiff:** Sarmiento - **Defendant:** King County **Background:** Sarmiento filed a lawsuit against King County concerning [specific issues in the case, e.g., personal injury, employment discrimination, contract dispute], arising from [brief description of the circumstances leading to the case, such as an accident or policy enforcement]. The plaintiff alleged that [specific allegations made against King County], leading to [impact or harm to Sarmiento]. **Issues:** The central legal issues in this case included: 1. [Issue 1: e.g., whether King County was liable for negligence] 2. [Issue 2: e.g., whether Sarmiento’s claims were barred by any statutory limitations] 3. [Any additional issues relevant to the case] **Arguments:** - **Plaintiff's arguments:** Sarmiento contended that King County failed to [specific failure or breach], which directly resulted in [harm or damages]. The plaintiff sought [damages, injunctive relief, etc.], arguing that the County’s actions constituted [wrongful act]. - **Defendant's arguments:** King County defended itself by arguing [specific defenses, such as governmental immunity, lack of evidence, or compliance with the law]. The County maintained that [relevant statutes or case law that support their defense]. **Court’s Decision:** The court ruled in favor of [either Sarmiento or King County], stating that [overview of the court’s reasoning and conclusions]. The judge highlighted [key legal principles or precedents referenced] that supported the final ruling. **Conclusion:** The outcome of Sarmiento v. King County resulted in [final order, such as payment of damages, dismissal of the case, etc.]. The case underscores [any broader implications, such as the limits of governmental liability, standards for negligence, or important statutory interpretations]. **Implications:** This case may set a precedent for future claims against municipal entities in Washington, particularly regarding [specific aspects of the law clarified by this case]. **Note:** The specifics such as court name, date, and detailed arguments would need to be filled in or adjusted based on the actual details from the case files and judgments.

Sarmiento v. King County


Oral Audio Transcript(Beta version)

no audio transcript available