From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Morse v. Bullseye Marketing, Inc.

The Court of Appeals of Washington, Division Two
Oct 5, 2004
123 Wn. App. 1037 (Wash. Ct. App. 2004)

Summary

concluding that exculpatory clause in home inspection contract is not contrary to public policy and thus is enforceable because residential home inspectors do not provide essential public service

Summary of this case from Finch v. Inspectech, LLC

Opinion

No. 30891-6-II.

October 5, 2004.

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for Clark County, No. 00-2-03807-4, Roger A. Bennett, J., entered September 23, 2003.


Affirmed by unpublished opinion per Bridgewater, J., concurred in by Quinn-Brintnall, C.J., and Houghton, J.


Summaries of

Morse v. Bullseye Marketing, Inc.

The Court of Appeals of Washington, Division Two
Oct 5, 2004
123 Wn. App. 1037 (Wash. Ct. App. 2004)

concluding that exculpatory clause in home inspection contract is not contrary to public policy and thus is enforceable because residential home inspectors do not provide essential public service

Summary of this case from Finch v. Inspectech, LLC

applying Tunkl factors to conclude that exculpatory clause in home inspection contract is not contrary to public policy and thus is enforceable; expressly noting that State of Washington does not specifically regulate home inspectors

Summary of this case from Finch v. Inspectech, LLC
Case details for

Morse v. Bullseye Marketing, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:JOANNE MORSE, Appellant, v. BULLSEYE MARKETING, INC., ET AL., Respondents

Court:The Court of Appeals of Washington, Division Two

Date published: Oct 5, 2004

Citations

123 Wn. App. 1037 (Wash. Ct. App. 2004)
123 Wash. App. 1037

Citing Cases

Finch v. Inspectech, LLC

Finally, Inspectech states that it does not provide an essential service or a service that is a matter of…