[No. 43689-2-II. Division Two. January 28, 2014.]
John Worthington, pro se.
Russell D. Hauge, Prosecuting Attorney for Kitsap County, and Ione S. George, Deputy, for respondent.AUTHOR: Jill M Johanson, A.C.J. We concur: Thomas R Bjorgen, J., Bradley A. Maxa, J.Jill M Johanson
FACTS ANALYSIS [1, 2] [3] We caution that [Tahoma Narcotics Enforcement Team's (TNET)] actions are not beyond judicial review. If, as the record indicates, TNET is designed to function as an informal association of various governmental entities setting joint policies and practices for conducting drug investigations and raids, its component members may be sued and may be subject to joint and several liability for any constitutional violations. (Emphasis added.) Hervey suggests that a plaintiff claiming constitutional violations could sue "component members" of the intergovernmental group, not the group as an independent entity. Worthington's other cases similarly involve distinguishable scenarios. See Lake Country Estates, Inc. v. Tahoe Reg'l Planning Agency, 440 U.S. 391, 401, 99 S. Ct. 1171, 59 L. Ed. 2d 401 (1979) (involving interstate compact creating "an agency comparable to a county or municipality"); Peters v. Del. River Port Auth. of Pa. & N.J., 16 F.3d 1346, 1351-52 (3rd Cir.) (involving intergovernmental group that maintained independent power to enter into contracts, set and collect tolls, and hold property), cert. denied, 513 U.S. 811 (1994).» BJORGEN and MAXA, JJ., concur. Reconsideration denied March 11, 2014.