Skip to main content

Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 56232-4-II Published Opinion.pdf

Citation
Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 56232-4-II Published Opinion.pdf
Jurisdiction
Washington (state)
Source verification
official_capture_completeness_unverified

Full Text

1,732 chars
property. The notice stated that Snow’s tenancy would terminate on January 31, 2022.

By the end of February 2022, Snow and his family still had not vacated the residence. Klee

filed a complaint for unlawful detainer and moved for an order to show cause.2 Klee’s materials

included a declaration from Ursula Klee, Klee’s daughter and power of attorney, stating that she

intended to sell the residence at issue and had been in contact with an individual regarding the

listing of the property.

In response, Snow argued that Klee had not satisfied the requirements of the statute at issue,

which allows a landlord to evict a tenant when the tenant remains in possession of the residence

after the owner “elects to sell” the residence and the tenant has been provided a 90-day notice of

termination of the tenancy. CP at 18. The statute specifies that an owner “elects to sell” when they

make reasonable attempts to sell or advertise the property “within 30 days after the tenant has

vacated.” RCW 59.18.650(2)(e).

2
See RCW 59.18.370, .380.
2
For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.

No. 56232-4-II

Snow claimed that a reasonable interpretation of the statute would require the owner to

make reasonable attempts to sell the property before the tenant may be evicted because the landlord

does not have cause for eviction unless the owner satisfies the elects to sell requirement in the

statute. Snow provided a declaration stating that no one had informed him that Klee intended to

sell the property aside from the 90-day notice to vacate. Klee’s reply materials consisted of another

declaration from his daughter claiming that Snow had “taken active steps to prevent” agents from