§52.4 Comparison with Federal Rule

• Jurisdiction: Washington

§52.4COMPARISON WITH FEDERAL RULE

CR 52(a) corresponds to FED. R. CIV. P. 52(a) but differs from it in a number of important respects. State v. Agee,89 Wn.2d 416, 421, 573P.2d355 (1977). CR 52(a) does not contain the standard for appellate review of findings of fact. In contrast, FED. R. CIV. P. 52(a)(6) states that a finding of fact "must not be set aside unless clearly erroneous, and the reviewing court must give due regard to the trial court's opportunity to judge the witnesses' credibility." This "clearly erroneous" standard for review of findings in federal court is more stringent than the standard for review in state courts in Washington. See §52.6(10), below.

CR 52(a) enumerates certain interlocutory decisions that require entry of findings and conclusions. FED. R. CIV. P. 52(a) does not contain a similar list. FED. R. CIV. P. 52(a) permits findings to be orally stated and recorded in open court. See DGHI Enters, v. Pac. Cities, Inc.,137...