Skip to main content

Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 900884.pdf

Citation
Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 900884.pdf
Jurisdiction
Washington (state)
Source verification
official_capture_completeness_unverified

Full Text

1,728 chars
attorney told him "there was no problem." 1 Clerk's Papers (CP) at 115-16.

On July 19, the Cabreras gave Segura a notice to vacate by August 7, 20 11.

Segura claimed that after sending the demand letter but before this move-out deadline,

Mr. Cabrera entered the unit without notice, changed the locks, removed some of

Segura's personal property, and tried to have Segura's car towed from the property.

Segura sued the Cabreras on July 26 for damages under the RL TA. The Cabreras

filed an answer, alleging, as the only affirmative defense, that"[ d]efendant had no

knowledge it was illegal." CP at 199.

1
The Cabreras have appeared prose throughout the proceedings. They have, however,
submitted no responsive briefing in the Court of Appeals or in this court. The Rental Housing
Association of Washington submitted an amicus brief supporting the Cabreras.

2
             
No. 90088-4

On June 22, 2012, Segura moved for summary judgment, seeking $1,200.00 for

the first month's prepaid rent and the security deposit, $150.00 for the utility deposit,

$2,000.00 in relocation assistance, $200.00 in gas expenses related to moving into a new

home, $1,000.00 in emotional distress damages, 2 and $5,209.55 in attorney fees and

costs.

The trial court granted Segura's motion for summary judgment but rejected the

request for emotional distress damages, concluding they were not recoverable under

RCW 59.18.085(3). The court denied Segura's motion for reconsideration, reasoning,

"The relationship of the parties arises from a contract to lease real property. The

misconduct on the part of the landlord was intentional but it is not an intentional tort.