interpretation is both contrary to the statute’s plain language and inconsistent
with the authority pursuant to which Congress enacted the statute. Accordingly,
we agree with Pinzon and Mendez and hold that, pursuant to the CARES Act,
Sherwood Auburn was required to provide a clear 30-day notice to pay rent or
vacate the premises.
A
When a superior court rules on a motion for revision, “the appeal is from
the superior court’s decision, not the commissioner’s.” State v. Ramer, 151
Wn.2d 106, 113, 86 P.3d 132 (2004). Accordingly, we review the ruling of the
superior court, not the ruling of the commissioner. Faciszewski v. Brown, 187
Wn.2d 308, 313 n.2, 386 P.3d 711 (2016). “‘Under RCW 2.24.050, the findings
and orders of a court commissioner not successfully revised become the orders
and findings of the superior court.’” In re Det. of L.K., 14 Wn. App. 2d 542, 550,
4
For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.
No. 84119-0-I/5
471 P.3d 975 (2020) (quoting Maldonado v. Maldonado, 197 Wn. App. 779, 789,
391 P.3d 546 (2017)).
“The meaning of a statute is a question of law reviewed de novo.” Dep’t of
Ecology v. Campbell & Gwinn, LLC, 146 Wn.2d 1, 9, 43 P.3d 4 (2002). In
interpreting a federal statute, our objective is to ascertain Congress’s intent.
Kitsap County Consol. Hous. Auth. v. Henry-Levingston, 196 Wn. App. 688, 701,
385 P.3d 188 (2016). “[I]f the statute’s meaning is plain on its face, then [we]
must give effect to that plain meaning as an expression of legislative intent.”
Dep’t of Ecology, 146 Wn.2d at 9-10.
B
1
Washington’s Residential Landlord-Tenant Act of 1973 (RLTA), chapter
59.18 RCW, provides that a landlord may commence an unlawful detainer action