speaking, the agreement addressed the nuisance allegations, including requiring the Allens to clean
the apartment and providing for inspection dates so that Princeton could verify improvement. But
the agreement also contained a provision requiring the payment of rent by a specific date and time.
The provision stated:
Defendants [the Allens] must deliver to Plaintiff [Princeton] November 2022,
December 2022, January 2023 and February 2023 rent by 5:00[ PM], on or before
February 13, 2023 and further agree to pay March 2023, and April 2023, rent by
the 6th of each month at 5:00 PM.
CP at 55.
In addition to the payment deadline, the settlement agreement also contained a provision
that allowed either party to set a show cause hearing with at least five days of notice if they believed
the agreement had been breached. It also allowed Princeton to seek a writ of restitution based
solely on breach of the settlement agreement and permitted the court to focus its decision on the
agreement, rather than the provisions of RLTA. Section 13 provided in relevant part:
If Plaintiff believes this agreement has been breached, then Plaintiff may set a
hearing, with at least five days of notice to Defendants’ attorney, to show cause as
to why Plaintiff is not entitled to a writ based on noncompliance of this
3
For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.
No. 58183-3-II
Agreement. . . . The court will resolve any dispute between the parties as to
compliance with this agreement.
CP at 55 (emphasis added). Following a breach, Princeton was entitled to an immediate writ.
Section 14 of the agreement stated in part: