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
Original Source: https://www.courts.wa.gov/opinions/pdf/D2%2059088-3-II%20Published%20Opinion.pdf ↗

Related Parts of This Source

Full Text

1,565 chars

2. Petitioner CLS holds a valid, first position lien on proceeds of sale
of the ECM Riverside Phase 2 property; subject, however, to the priorities set forth
in RCW 7.60.230(1)(b). As the creditor obtaining the appointment of the Receiver,
the proceeds of CLS’s collateral must first be applied to the extent necessary to pay
actual, necessary costs and expenses incurred in the administration of the
Receivership Estate, including allowed fees and reimbursement of reasonable
charges and expenses of the Receiver and professional persons employed by the
Receiver.

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

No. 59088-3-II

CP at 740. The superior court ordered that “[p]rior to any distributions of Estate property, the

Receiver shall refund LGI’s $450,000 Phase 2 earnest money deposit to LGI.” CP at 740. The

superior court also allowed CLS’s claim “in the amount of $7,442,774.13, including interest and

other charges, less the preliminary distribution already received by [CLS] in the amount of

$3,000,000.” CP at 740.

CLS moved for reconsideration of the superior court’s order granting the Receiver’s

motion to administer claims and determine claim priority. The superior court denied CLS’s

motion.

CLS appeals.6

ANALYSIS

CLS argues that the superior court erred when it held that the Phase 2 deposit was not part

of the receivership estate and ordered the return of LGI’s Phase 2 deposit from the receivership

estate. CLS also argues that the superior court erred when, based on bankruptcy law, it allowed