Cagle
Cagle v. King County
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Ruth Cagle appeals the district court’s order affirming the decision of the King County Hearing Examiner. Because the relevant facts are known to the parties they are not repeated here.
I
Cagle’s first claim on appeal is that the Seattle King County Department of Public Health (the “Department”) failed to perform an adequate inspection of her premises as required under Washington law. 1 Cagle’s primary contention is that the inspection was deficient because Jasmine George, a representative of the Department, failed to physically enter and to examine some of the allegedly contaminated areas of her residence.
But the Hearing Examiner determined that George’s inspection of the premises included consultation with knowledgeable police officers who were present at the scene. Indeed the Hearing Examiner concluded that the officers informed George of *452 hazardous chemical use and storage on the premises, that the shed located in close proximity to the home had been used as a methamphetamine laboratory, that sales of methamphetamine had been conducted from the home, and that various drug paraphernalia had been discovered on site.