Chapter §1.8 Strategic and Practical Considerations

• Jurisdiction: Washington

§1.8 STRATEGIC AND PRACTICAL CONSIDERATIONS

CR 1 is an effective tool if you are faced with an opposing party who attempts to thwart discovery or use the rules in an overly technical way that results in delay or unwarranted costs. See, e.g., Seattle Nw. Sec. Corp. v. SDG Holding Co., 61 Wn.App. 725, 743-44, 812 P.2d 488 (1991).

Practice Tip: Cite CR 1 and the cases discussed above in support of or opposition to motions when your adversary's position would result in delay and/or unjustifiable expense. Similarly, if you are confronted with an unusual situation or one that requires unusual relief, invoke CR 1 to argue that your desired outcome represents a "just" determination, a "speedy and inexpensive" outcome, or preferably both. CR 1 should also be argued any time an adversary argues for a narrow interpretation of a procedural rule.

The rule also may buttress various other motions, such as motions for separate trial or for joinder. See Kohl v. Zemiller, 12 Wn.App. 370, 372, 529 P.2d 861 (1974) (using CR 1 after judgment and appeal to prevent counsel from using technical requirements of a substitution statute to invalidate a judgment).