Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 58183-3-II Published Opinion.pdf

of the premises at the time of appeal. MOSM, LLC v. Deegan, ___ Wn. App. ___, 544 P.3d 591,

594 (2024); Hous. Auth. of City of Pasco & Franklin County v. Pleasant, 126 Wn. App. 382, 388,

109 P.3d 422 (2005). The law distinguishes between possession and the right of possession.

Pleasant, 126 Wn. App. at 387. “If the tenant does not concede the right of possession,

she has the right to have the issue determined.” IBF, LLC v. Heuft, 141 Wn. App. 624, 631,

174 P.3d 95 (2007).

Because the Allens continue to assert a right to possession on appeal, this case is not moot.

II. THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT VIOLATES RCW 59.18.230(1)(b)

Turning to the Allens’ substantive arguments, they contend that the settlement agreement

was void and unenforceable under RCW 59.18.230(1)(b). We agree.

A. LEGAL PRINCIPLES

In 2021, the legislature enacted significant changes to RLTA. LAWS OF 2021, ch. 115,

§ 15. Relevant to this case, RLTA now includes a broad antiwaiver provision contained in

RCW 59.18.230(1)(b). The provision expressly prohibits agreements between landlords and

tenants from waiving certain tenant rights otherwise established by RLTA. RCW 59.18.230(1)(b).

The language of RCW 59.18.230(1)(b) is sweeping in its scope:

7
For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.

No. 58183-3-II