 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Jones v. Marshall8/28/2000
has failed to show why this information demonstrates that she was especially vulnerable to sexual exploitation, or how Marshall used the information to exploit her. In other words, Jones has failed to allege sufficient facts to show that Marshall "blatantly misus{ed} his professional status to exploit {her} vulnerability." Thus, the facts do not support a finding that Marshall committed an act of moral turpitude under In re Heard and Haley. Seeing no other basis to support Jones's claim that Marshall breached his professional duties toward her, we affirm the trial court's dismissal of the case under CR 12(b)(6).
Finally, Jones argues that the trial court abused its discretion in refusing to consider the factual allegations contained in her declaration when it ruled on the CR 12(b)(6) motion. Even when the factual allegations of Jones's declaration are considered in addition to those in her complaint, Jones has failed to assert a set of facts that would entitle her to relief. Therefore, we do not reach Jones's argument that the trial court abused its discretion in failing to consider the declaration.
AFFIRMED.
Page 1 2 3 4 Washington Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|