The Plaintiff in this case was a Washington State Patrol officer.? ?He claimed his state law disability benefits vested when he was disabled in the line of duty.? ?The Superior Court granted summary judgment ?to ?the? State.?? ?Division ?Two reversed and held that the Plaintiff was entitled to summary judgment.? ?The Court further held that the Plaintiff was entitled to attorneys? fees under RCW 49.48.030.?? The Court held that disability benefits under RCW 43.43 are ?vested compensatory payments? distinguishable from contingent benefits such as unused sick leave.
Merino v. State, — Wn. App. —-, 320 P.3d 153 (Div. II 3/11/14) (Hunt, Worswick, Penoyar).