Skip to main content

Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 841190.pdf

Citation
Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 841190.pdf
Jurisdiction
Washington (state)
Source verification
official_capture_completeness_unverified

Full Text

1,744 chars
therein “are properly considered as limitations to our state’s unlawful detainer

statute.” Indigo, 169 Wn. App. at 423. There, federal law required the landlord,

which had accepted the financial benefits of participation in the federal section 8

program, to prove good cause to terminate a tenancy. Indigo, 169 Wn. App. at

414. Notwithstanding that our state law did not require such proof, we held that

the landlord was required to comply with the federal program’s rules and

regulations in the state unlawful detainer action. Indigo, 169 Wn. App. at 414.

We reasoned that, until the landlord had proved good cause, the tenant could not

be found to be unlawfully detaining the premises. Indigo, 169 Wn. App. at 414.

We explained:

Just as the parties to a lease may contract to allow additional time
for compliance before a tenant may be found to have unlawfully
detained the premises, so may a lease require something more
than an immaterial breach of a lease provision to support such a
determination. Similarly, where a landlord has accepted the
substantial financial benefits that accompany participation in the

13
For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.
No. 84119-0-I/14

section 8 program, a higher bar to a finding of wrongful occupation
is imposed.

Indigo, 169 Wn. App. at 423 (citation omitted). 10 Thus, we concluded that,

“where a landlord has accepted the the substantial financial benefits” of a federal

program, “the landlord must abide by the rules of that program in any unlawful

detainer action.” Indigo, 169 Wn. App. at 422.

Here, the plain language of the CARES Act notice provision requires that

landlords subject to the act provide a 30-day notice to tenants prior to