North Quinault Properties, Llc v. State Of Washington
76017-3
| Wash. Ct. App. | Jan 30, 2017Background
- North Quinault Properties LLC (Properties LLC) and two individual owners sued the State and Commissioner of Public Lands seeking declaratory relief about ownership and public access to Lake Quinault and related injunctive and mandamus relief.
- The Quinault Indian Nation and the United States claim ownership interests in Lake Quinault based on an 1856 Treaty and an 1873 Executive Order; those sovereigns were not joined in Properties LLC’s suit.
- A related federal suit by other lakeshore owners against the Nation and the State was dismissed on sovereign-immunity grounds.
- The State moved for summary judgment arguing the suit could not proceed under the UDJA because all persons claiming an interest must be joined and the Nation/United States could not be joined.
- The trial court granted summary judgment dismissing the action with prejudice; Properties LLC appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether RCW 7.24.110 (UDJA joinder) bars the declaratory action | Properties LLC: court can adjudicate owners’ and public access rights without deciding Nation’s title; joinder unnecessary | State: UDJA requires all persons claiming interests be made parties; Nation/US claim interests and cannot be joined due to sovereign immunity | Held: RCW 7.24.110 bars the action because absent Nation/US would be prejudiced and cannot be joined |
| Whether UDJA permits relief under RCW 7.24.020 (challenge to State action) | Properties LLC: statutes permitting declaratory relief and general UDJA provisions allow relief | State: RCW 7.24.020 limits declaratory relief to questions of construction or validity, not to compel enforcement or adjudicate ownership; other UDJA provisions do not override joinder requirement | Held: RCW 7.24.020 and other UDJA provisions bar the requested declaratory relief |
| Whether a writ of mandamus should issue to compel the State to protect access under the public trust doctrine | Properties LLC: State has a clear, non‑discretionary duty to maintain public access and must be compelled | State: Public trust duties involve substantial discretion and mandamus cannot compel discretionary or general courses of conduct; plaintiffs’ request lacks specificity | Held: Mandamus denied — duty is discretionary and relief sought is impermissibly general |
| Whether injunctive relief was proper to protect access | Properties LLC: entitlement to injunction to protect clear legal or equitable rights and prevent imminent invasion | State: Plaintiffs cannot show a clear, established right because deciding ownership/access requires joinder of Nation/US; other injunction elements unmet | Held: Injunction denial affirmed — plaintiffs failed to establish the required clear right |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Krall, 125 Wn.2d 146 (statutory "shall" is mandatory)
- Ranger Ins. Co. v. Pierce County, 164 Wn.2d 545 (summary judgment reviewed de novo)
- Bainbridge Citizens United v. Dep’t of Natural Res., 147 Wn. App. 365 (UDJA joinder and limits on declaratory relief)
- Walker v. Munro, 124 Wn.2d 402 (mandamus unavailable to compel discretionary acts)
- United States v. Mitchell, 445 U.S. 535 (sovereign immunity principles regarding suits against the United States)
- Michigan v. Bay Mills Indian Community, 134 S. Ct. 2024 (tribal sovereign immunity discussion)
- San Juan County v. No New Gas Tax, 160 Wn.2d 141 (injunction standards and review)
- Wash. State Geoduck Harvest Ass’n v. Dep’t of Nat. Res., 124 Wn. App. 441 (public trust duties involve discretionary balancing by DNR)