Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 59088-3-II Published Opinion.pdf
- Citation
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 59088-3-II Published Opinion.pdf
- Jurisdiction
- Washington (state)
- Source verification
- official_capture_completeness_unverified
Related Parts of This Source
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 59088-3-II Published Opinion.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 59088-3-II Published Opinion.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 59088-3-II Published Opinion.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 59088-3-II Published Opinion.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 59088-3-II Published Opinion.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 59088-3-II Published Opinion.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 59088-3-II Published Opinion.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 59088-3-II Published Opinion.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 59088-3-II Published Opinion.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 59088-3-II Published Opinion.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 59088-3-II Published Opinion.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 59088-3-II Published Opinion.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 59088-3-II Published Opinion.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 59088-3-II Published Opinion.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 59088-3-II Published Opinion.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 59088-3-II Published Opinion.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 59088-3-II Published Opinion.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 59088-3-II Published Opinion.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 59088-3-II Published Opinion.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 59088-3-II Published Opinion.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 59088-3-II Published Opinion.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 59088-3-II Published Opinion.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 59088-3-II Published Opinion.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 59088-3-II Published Opinion.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 59088-3-II Published Opinion.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 59088-3-II Published Opinion.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 59088-3-II Published Opinion.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 59088-3-II Published Opinion.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 59088-3-II Published Opinion.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 59088-3-II Published Opinion.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 59088-3-II Published Opinion.pdf
Full Text
1,639 charsProperty Sale.” CP at 589. The Receiver cited to bankruptcy cases and argued that “[i]n the bankruptcy context, courts have held that funds held in escrow, and funds traceable to escrow deposits which have not been earned, are not property of the estate.” CP at 590. Further, the Receiver argued that because the PSA Phase 2 closing never occurred, ECM never gained title to the Phase 2 deposit, and therefore, the “$450,000 cannot be considered Receivership Estate Property, [and] it should be returned to LGI prior to any other distributions.” CP at 590. CLS objected to the Receiver’s recommendation that LGI receive $450,000 ahead of CLS’s claim. CLS argued that bankruptcy principles were not applicable and even if the Phase 2 deposit was traceable to an escrow account, LGI ultimately had an unsecured claim. The superior court granted the Receiver’s request to return the $450,000 to LGI prior to any other distributions. In its written order (May 11, 2023 Order), the superior court found: 1. The Phase 2 earnest money deposit in the amount of $450,000 traceable to LGI (the “LGI Earnest Money Deposit”) is not property of the Receivership Estate as a result of the Receiver’s rejection of the ECM/LGI Purchase and Sale Agreement for Phase 2, and acceptance of a new purchase and sale agreement with D.R. Horton, previously approved by this court. Pursuant to RCW 7.60.130, the Receiver’s rejection of the LGI Purchase and Sale Agreement is treated as a breach of that contract, occurring immediately prior to the Receiver’s appointment, and terminated any right of the Receiver to retain the LGI Earnest Money Deposit.