Volume 79 — Washington Reports, Second Series

<bold>[1] Statutes — Construction — Superfluous Provisions.</bold> When construing a statute, no word, clause, or sentence is to be held superfluous, void, or insignificant; the statute is not to be modified by construction, and the words of the statute are to be given their usual and ordinary meaning. <bold>[2] Insurance — Premiums — Factors Considered — Expense Elements</bold> <bold>— What Constitutes.</bold> "Expense elements," as that term is used in RCW <cross_reference>48.18.480</cross_reference> which prohibits unfair discrimination in insurance rates and terms when expense elements and other factors are similar, includes an insurer's expenses incurred in the acquisition and maintenance of policies or in the collection of premiums; it does not include an insurer's "loss-associated expenses" such as the cost of processing claims, settlements, and legal fees related thereto. As so defined, "expense elements" are a part of an insurer's method of operation, which under RCW <cross_reference>48.19.030</cross_reference> may be reflected in an insurer's rates. [See 43 Am.Jur.2d, Insurance §§ 535, 536.] <bold>[3] Insurance — Premiums — Factors Considered — Expense Elements</bold> <bold>— Mass. Marketing.</bold> An insurance company's savings in operational<page_number>Page 463</page_number> costs resulting from mass marketing, <italic>i.e.</italic>, the sale and maintenance of policies through a group such as a union or common employer, constitute a reduction in the "expense element," and such savings may be passed on to the insured without constituting unfair discrimination in rates within the meaning of RCW <cross_reference>48.18.480</cross_reference>. <bold>[4] Administrative Law and Procedure — Appeal and Error —</bold> <bold>Findings of Fact — Review — Administrative Proceeding.</bold> ROA I-43, which requires a trial court's findings of fact to be accepted as the established facts on appeal unless error is assigned to them, applies to the specific findings contemplated by RCW 34.04.130(6) when a superior court reviews a proceeding governed by the Administrative Procedure Act (RCW 34.04). FINLEY, J., concurs by separate opinion; SHARP, J., did not participate in the disposition of this case.

<bold>[1] Trial — Taking Case From Jury — Directed Verdict — Failure</bold> <bold>to Grant — Effect.</bold> A party whose motion for a directed verdict was denied has suffered no harm when the jury has returned a verdict in his favor. <bold>[2] Damages — Evidence — Opinion of Owner of Property.</bold> The owner of damaged property is competent to testify as to its decrease in value, however he is an interested witness and his testimony will be weighed as such. His uncorroborated testimony, even though uncontradicted, is not binding on the jury. <bold>[3] Damages — Assessment — Discretion of Jury.</bold> The amount of damages is a matter within the discretion of the jury. <bold>[4] New Trial — Damages Inadequate Damages — Discretion of</bold> <bold>Court.</bold> The granting of a motion for new trial on the grounds of inadequate damages is a matter peculiarly within the discretion of the trial court. Its refusal will not be reversed except for a manifest abuse of discretion. [See 58 Am.Jur.2d, New Trial §§ 149, 153.] <bold>[5] Trial — Instructions — Requests — Written Requests —</bold> <bold>Necessity.</bold> Under CR 51, error cannot be based upon an oral motion to give instructions.<page_number>Page 845</page_number>