-15-
For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.
Faciszewski, et al. v. Brown, et al., 92978-5
[must] be afforded 'a meaningful opportunity to be heard'" (quoting Carlstrom v.
Hemline, 98 Wn. App. 780, 790, 990 P.2d 986 (2000))). The Court of Appeals
acknowledged this point: "Although a show cause hearing is not the final
determination of the rights ofthe parties in an unlawful detainer action, the trial court
frequently decides the necessity of a trial at the hearing. As occurred here, the show
cause hearing often provides the only opportunity for a tenant to present any
evidence." Faciszewski, 192 Wn. App. at 446 (emphasis added) (footnote omitted).
At a show cause hearing, "[t]he court shall examine the parties and witnesses orally
to ascertain the merits of the complaint and answer." RCW 59.18.380. The court
may not "disregard evidence that credibly supports a legitimate defense." Leda, 150
Wn. App. at 81. Otherwise, RCW 59.18.380 would be rendered meaningless,
"nothing more than a requirement that superior courts hold perfunctory and
purposeless hearings on matters to be decided solely on the pleadings." I d. at 84.
In the context of the JCEO, a show cause hearing is not meaningful if it does
not provide a tenant with the opportunity to contest the landlord's certification of
just cause. The only opportunity to contest the certification appears to be at the show
cause hearing, where a tenant has the "opportunity ... to contest the eviction." SMC
22.206.160(C)(1 ). The JCEO does not specify what effect the filing of a certification
has on the determination of just cause at a show cause hearing. Subsection (C)(4)