268 P.3d 929
Wash.2012Background
- ZDI Gaming distributed an electronic pull-tab VIP machine regulated by the Washington Gambling Commission.
- ZDI challenged regulatory interpretations that the VIP machine violated preexisting cash-related regulations.
- After initial administrative proceedings, ZDI sought judicial review of Commission actions; the State suggested Thurston County as proper venue.
- Pierce County Superior Court heard the petition, then transferred to Thurston County upon the State's motion.
- Thurston County Superior Court reversed the Commission; the court remanded and awarded attorney fees to ZDI in an action under RAP; the cognate appeals followed.
- The questions before the court centered on whether RCW 9.46.095 is a jurisdictional or a venue provision and whether the VIP cash card is cash or a cash equivalent.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether RCW 9.46.095 restricts subject matter jurisdiction | ZDI | State | RCW 9.46.095 is venue, not jurisdiction |
| Whether Thurston County has exclusive appellate jurisdiction over Gambling Commission rulings | ZDI | State | Thurston County has exclusive appellate jurisdiction; Pierce lacked subject matter jurisdiction |
| Whether the lower courts correctly treated RCW 9.46.095 as venue | ZDI | State | Correctly treated as venue; proper forum Thurston County |
| Whether the VIP cash card is the functional equivalent of cash under the regulations | ZDI | Gambling Commission | Cash card is functionally equivalent to cash; violates regulations as interpreted |
| Whether ZDI is entitled to attorney fees under RAP 18.1 | ZDI | State | Denied as untimely |
Key Cases Cited
- Dougherty v. Dep’t of Labor & Indus., 150 Wn.2d 310 (2003) (distinguishes jurisdiction from venue; appellate review context)
- Shoop v. Kittitas County, 149 Wn.2d 29 (2003) (venue instead of jurisdiction for statutory filing requirements)
- State ex rel. Pierce County v. Superior Court, 86 Wash. 685 (1915) (sovereign immunity context and jurisdictional limits on suits against the state)
- Blanchard v. Golden Age Brewing Co., 188 Wash. 396 (1936) (constitutional limits on legislature’s power to divest judicial jurisdiction)
- Werner v. State, 129 Wn.2d 485 (1996) (limits on jurisdiction; distinguishes subject matter from venue)