to authorize only damages for economic loss." Cooper, 132 S. Ct. at 1453 (emphasis
added). Given that narrow issue, that Court entered the narrow holding that the civil
remedies provision did not waive the United States' sovereign immunity with
respect to such recovery. Id. The Court explained, "When waiving the
Government's sovereign immunity, Congress must speak unequivocally. Here, we
conclude that it did not. As a consequence, we adopt an interpretation of 'actual
damages' limited to proven pecuniary or economic harm." Id. This case, in contrast,
does not involve the scope of sovereign immunity. In addition, this case deals with
the interpretation of a Washington, not a federal, statute; the answer to our question
is controlled by state, not federal, law.
IV. SEGURA CANNOT RECOVER EMOTIONAL DISTRESS DAMAGES HERE
Although the RLT A permits displaced tenants to recover emotional distress
damages as actual damages, I agree with the majority that Segura is entitled to no
actual damages in this case. RCW 59.18.085(3)(e) states that displaced tenants can
recover "any actual damages sustained by them . . . that exceed the amount of
relocation assistance that is payable." (Emphasis added.) The "relocation
10
Segura v. Cabrera, No. 90088-4
(Gordon McCloud, J., Concurring in Result)
assistance that is payable" to displaced tenants is "the greater amount of two
thousand dollars per dwelling unit or three times the monthly rent." RCW
59.18.085(3)(b ).
Here, Segura is entitled only to actual damages that exceed $2,000 because
this amount is greater than three times Segura's monthly rent of $600. Segura
requested $1,000 for emotional distress and $200 for gasoline expenses-both