Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 687271.pdf

4 Munden v. Hazelriqg, 105 Wn.2d 39, 45, 711 P.2d 295 (1985).
5 Munden, 105 Wn.2d at 45.
6 Munden, 105 Wn.2d at 45 (quoting First Union Mamt.. Inc. v. Slack, 36
Wn. App. 849, 854, 679 P.2d 936 (1984)).
7 RCW 59.12.180.
8 CR 81(a); Christensen v. Ellsworth, 162 Wn.2d 365, 374, 173 P.3d 228
(2007).
9 Christensen, 162 Wn.2d at 372.
10 See Hous. Auth. v. Terry, 114 Wn.2d 558, 569, 789 P.2d 745 (1990).
11 RCW 59.12.050. Superior courts have broad general jurisdiction over
real estate disputes. See Wash. Const, art. IV, § 6.
-5-
             

No. 68727-1-I (consol. with
No. 68927-4-I) / 6

gives jurisdiction over unlawful detainer actions to the superior court.12 This
jurisdiction "remains constant regardless of procedural missteps by the parties,"13
but a party filing an action after improper notice "'may not maintain such action or

avail itself ofthe superior court's jurisdiction.'"14

Sufficiency of Service and Notice

A challenge to the adequacy of notice presents a mixed question of law

and fact,15 which we review de novo.16

RCW 59.12.040 provides that