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

Washington’s unlawful detainer procedure to evict a public housing tenant, it must comply with

the appropriate state statutory procedural requirements. 114 Wn.2d at 566-69. In other words, a

9
             

No. 47696-7-II

PHA must comply with both federal law and Washington unlawful detainer law to evict a public

housing tenant. See id. at 568-69.

Kimbra does not contest that her lease was lawfully terminated under federal law. Both

the hearing officer and the trial court concluded that the termination was lawful. The question

here is which subsection of RCW 59.12.030 applies to Housing Kitsap’s unlawful detainer

action. If RCW 59.12.030(1) applies, Housing Kitsap was not required to give Kimbra an

opportunity to cure her lease violations. If RCW 59.12.030(4) applies, it is undisputed that

Housing Kitsap did not comply with its notice and opportunity to cure requirements.

B. APPLICATION OF RCW 59.12.030(1)

Whether RCW 59.12.030(1) or RCW 59.12.030(4) applies here depends on whether

Kimbra’s lease expired when the lease term ended (because of Housing Kitsap’s termination) or

the lease renewed automatically at the end of its term despite termination. To determine this

issue, we must interpret 42 U.S.C. § 1437d(l)(1). Considering the statutory scheme as a whole

and interpreting the statute to avoid absurd results, we hold that a public housing lease that has

been lawfully terminated does not automatically renew and expires at the end of its specified

term. Here, Housing Kitsap lawfully terminated Kimbra’s lease effective December 31, 2014.

Therefore, we hold that Kimbra’s lease expired on that date and that Housing Kitsap could file