Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 47696-7-II Published Opinion.pdf

its unlawful detainer action under RCW 59.12.030(4), which requires that she be given an

opportunity to cure. Housing Kitsap argues that because it lawfully terminated Kimbra’s lease

effective December 31, 2014, the lease ended on that date and it could file an unlawful detainer

action under RCW 59.12.030(1) without giving Kimbra an opportunity to cure.

We hold that 42 U.S.C. § 1437d(l)(1)’s automatic renewal provision does not apply after

a public housing lease has been lawfully terminated. Therefore, we hold that once a lease has

been lawfully terminated for cause, a PHA may bring an unlawful detainer action under RCW

59.12.030(1) after the lease term ends without giving the tenant an opportunity to cure.

A. LEGAL PRINCIPLES

1. Standard of Review

The trial court entered findings of fact and conclusions of law following a bench trial.

Kimbra does not assign error to the trial court’s factual findings. Therefore, they are verities on

appeal. State v. Westvang, 184 Wn. App. 1, 5, 335 P.3d 1024 (2014). But included in the trial

court’s findings of fact were “findings” that Housing Kitsap’s termination of Kimbra’s lease

prevented it from automatically renewing. That determination was a legal conclusion that

required the trial court to interpret the lease provisions and federal law. We review legal

conclusions de novo, even if denominated as findings of fact. Robel v. Roundup Corp., 148

Wn.2d 35, 43, 59 P.3d 611 (2002).

6
             

No. 47696-7-II

2. Federal Public Housing Law

The terms of PHA lease agreements are dictated by federal statute, specifically 42 U.S.C.

§ 1437d, as well as HUD regulations. Relevant here, 42 U.S.C. § 1437d(l)(1) states that PHAs