Nicholas E. Boone, Petitioner, V. City Of Seattle, Respondent

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON
DIVISION ONE
NICHOLAS E. BOONE, and all
others similarly situated,
Petitioner,
CITY OF SEATTLE,
Respondent.
No. 73534-9-1
UNPUBLISHED OPINION
FILED: 	May 2, 2016
o
I
V?
c/i
CO
o^
3> —'
$1)1"
•>t3fT|
rr 3*"'""
CDtn
o—
Verellen, C.J. — In this class action seeking declaratory and other relief, the
superior court ruled that individual class members who seek to challenge the validity of
traffic infractions they voluntarily paid in municipal court must first seek to vacate the
resulting judgments under the rules governing municipal courts. 	The superior court
reserved other issues that might remain for the class litigation. 	The parties jointly
agreed to certify the court's ruling for discretionary review under RAP 2.3(b)(4),
including that "immediate review of the order may materially advance the ultimate
termination of the litigation."1 	This court granted discretionary review.
The City of Seattle now disputes the jurisdiction of this court because each of the
individual infractions is less than $200. 	The Court of Appeals is statutorily barred from
reviewing appeals of "civil actions at law for the recovery of money or personal property
1 Clerk's Papers (CP) at 781-82. 	The superior court also entered a CR 54(b)
certification that there is no just cause for delay, but did not enter any supporting
findings of fact. 	CP at 780, 782.
1

No. 73534-9-1
when the original amount in controversy, or the value of the property does not exceed
the sum of two hundred dollars."2 The parties have provided limited briefing on the
amount in controversy limitation.
Under RAP 2.3(b)(4), "discretionary review may be granted."
Under all of the circumstances, it is not clear what benefits would result from
immediate review. 	We conclude that review was improvidently granted. This matter is
dismissed.
WE CONCUR:
*7{\ja^ 	i ^r
2 RCW 2.06.030. 	The Washington Constitution imposes a similar $200 amount
in controversy threshold on the Washington Supreme Court, but expressly allows the
Supreme Court to consider challenges to municipal fines. 	Wash. Const, art. IV, § 4;
City of Bremerton v. Spears, 134Wn.2d 141, 152, 949 P.2d 347 (1998).