This Note proposes both selective criteria and a procedure designed to implement the unique purpose of the private attorney general exception. The Note first describes the development of the private attorney general exception in both federal and state courts, and then traces the development of equitable exceptions in Washington. The analysis begins by identifying and comparing the purposes of the private attorney general, common fund, and substantial benefit exceptions, and critiques the ability of the Miotke standard to implement the purpose of the private attorney general exception. The analysis then proposes more discriminating criteria and a procedural approach that effectively applies the private attorney general exception. Finally, the proposed criteria and procedures are applied to Miotke to demonstrate how the court could have reached a more equitable result.
Implementing the Incentive Purpose of the Private Attorney General Exception—Miotke v. City of Spokane, 101 Wn. 2d 307, 678 P.2d 803 (1984),
60 Wash. L. Rev.
Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.uw.edu/wlr/vol60/iss2/10