The Tenants claim to have been at the rental property when Faciszewski
taped the notice to the door. The Tenants actually received the notice and did
not vacate the rental premises on or before July 31.
On August 1, the Landlords filed a complaint for unlawful detainer and
requested a show cause hearing.1 At the show cause hearing, the Tenants
alleged retaliation as a defense to the complaint. A court commissioner rejected
this defense. But the commissioner set the case for trial because of "subsequent
questions at issue" as to who was going to live in the house. The Landlords filed
a motion to revise the commissioner's ruling.
RCW 59.18.365.
NO. 72611-1-1/3
The trial court revised the commissioner's decision, struck the trial date,
and entered an order for a writ of restitution. The trial court found that the
Landlords provided the Tenants with adequate notice to vacate and satisfied the
just cause provision of the Seattle Municipal Code (SMC).2 The trial court
concluded that the Landlords were entitled to possession of the rental property, a
writ of restitution, unpaid rent, court costs, and attorney fees. The trial court also
concluded that the Tenants' subjective belief about the Landlords' stated reason
for the eviction did not excuse the Tenants' noncompliance with the termination
notice. The trial court denied the Tenants' motion for reconsideration.
The trial court entered judgment in favor of the Landlords, awarding them
unpaid rent from August 1 to September 19, attorney fees, and court costs. The
Tenants appeal.
STANDARD OF REVIEW
Generally, if the parties base their trial court arguments entirely on written