It all depends on whether their case can be reviewed as a matter of right. If it can't, it can be reviewed by disrectionary review.
Concerning discretionary review, the following is from the Washington Appellate Courts website:
In order to gain review of a trial court decision, the party seeking review must file a notice for discretionary review. The notice for discretionary review must be filed within 30 days after the act of the trial court’s decision to be reviewed...Ifthe appellate court accepts discretionary review of a trial court decision, it will do so by granting a motion for discretionary review. Regular motion procedure governs.I'm not an attorney, so I have no idea how this will shake out exactly. But I suspect that Judge Frazier's ruling contitues a final judgment and therefore has a right to appeal. That being the case, according to the court's caseload page, in 2005 it took an average of 526 days from initial filing to final decision.
The appellate court process flow chart can be found here.
PARD states on their website:
PARD member Alex Hammond remarked that it “is important to realize that nothing PARD has done puts Wal-Mart under an injunction. They could have started building months ago. That they haven’t started suggests that they have understood all along that we have a strong case.”So, PARD is taunting now. But if they do try to stop construction, they will be forced to put up a hefty appeal bond for hundreds of thousands of dollars. We'll see how jocular the PARDners feel then.
In the meantime, the city needs to issue a building permit to Wal-Mart ASAP. The store will be built by the time the appeal is heard and it will all be moot.
BUILD IT NOW!
Technorati Tags: wal-mart walmart