Volume 84 — Washington Reports, Second Series

<bold>[1] Costs — Attorneys' Fees — Inherent Power of Court.</bold> An appellate court has the inherent power to award attorneys' fees incurred on appeal when there is statutory authorization for the award of such fees. <bold>[2] Courts — Jurisdiction — Nonresidents — Attorneys' Fees — On</bold> <bold>Appeal.</bold> RCW <cross_reference>4.28.185</cross_reference>(5), that portion of the long-arm statute which permits an award of attorneys' fees to a prevailing defendant, authorizes the awarding of such fees at the appellate court level. <bold>[3] Courts — Jurisdiction — Nonresidents — Attorneys' Fees —</bold> <bold>Prevailing Party — Cross Claims.</bold> The prevailing party, for purposes of an award of attorneys' fees under the long-arm statute (RCW <cross_reference>4.28.185</cross_reference>(5)), is the party who prevails on the merits, without regard to his success on a cross claim relating to attorneys' fees. <bold>[4] Courts — Jurisdiction — Nonresidents — Attorneys' Fees —</bold> <bold>Purpose.</bold> The intent of the attorneys' fees provision of RCW <cross_reference>4.28.185</cross_reference>, the long-arm statute, is to permit courts, in their discretion, to award such fees as compensation for an out-of-state defendant having to defend against a frivolous action or one in which the burden upon such a defendant outweighs convenience to him and would otherwise offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice. <block_quote> [See Ann. 51 A.L.R.3d 1336; 20 Am.Jur.2d, Costs §§ 79, 80.]</block_quote> HALE, C.J., and STAFFORD and UTTER, JJ., did not participate in the disposition of this case.<page_number>Page 603</page_number>

<bold>[1] Zoning — Certiorari — Review of Zoning Enactment.</bold> Certiorari is a proper means of securing review of a zoning enactment. <bold>[2] Zoning — Parties — Standing — Protected Interest.</bold> Persons residing within an area encompassed in a zoning action have a sufficient protected interest to challenge such action. <bold>[3] Zoning — Judicial Review — Administrative Record —</bold> <bold>Inadequacy — Effect.</bold> A reviewing court may vacate a zoning action on the basis of the zoning authority's failure to supply the court with an adequate record of proceedings when so requested. <bold>[4] Zoning — Enactment — Statutory Requirements — Interim</bold> <bold>Zoning.</bold> RCW <cross_reference>36.70.790</cross_reference>, which permits "interim zoning" to be enacted without compliance with the procedural requirements which normally apply to the enactment of zoning controls under the planning enabling act (RCW 36.70), is intended to be a temporary protective measure only. A zoning enactment which is characterized as an interim measure will nevertheless be subject to such requirements when it is enacted without a determination that an emergency exists and when the action is to apply for a relatively extended period. [See Ann. 136 A.L.R. 845; 58 Am. Jur., Zoning § 137.] <bold>[5] Zoning — Environment — SEPA — Impact Statement — Adoption of</bold> <bold>Zoning Code.</bold> The initial adoption of a zoning code is a major action and is legislative in nature. An impact statement must therefore be filed to comply with the State Environmental Policy Act of 1971 if the adoption of such code significantly affects the environment.<page_number>Page 797</page_number> <bold>[6] Environment — SEPA — Impact Statement — Difficulty of</bold> <bold>Compliance.</bold> The difficulty which may be involved in preparing an environmental impact statement does not excuse the failure to prepare such statement. <bold>[7] Zoning — Proceeding — Appearance of Fairness — Ownership of</bold> <bold>Property.</bold> The appearance of fairness doctrine is not violated by a planning commission member's ownership of property which is located a considerable distance from the area of a zoning action, absent a showing that his property would be directly or indirectly affected by the action.