Scott Egbert v. Richard Jorgensen (2025)

Citation: Scott Egbert v. Richard Jorgensen (2025)
Parent Document: Scott Egbert v. Richard Jorgensen (2025)
Jurisdiction: Washington (state)
Effective Date: 2025-12-10
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/10750781/scott-egbert-v-richard-jorgensen/ ↗

Full Text

1,303 chars

10
   The main thrust of the Jorgensens’ appeal is that the superior court erred because it authorized
a writ of restitution without a trial. But the Jorgensens also assign error to the superior court’s
finding of fact that “suggests” the Jorgensens owed rent. Br. of Appellant at 3. Specifically, they
argue that substantial evidence does not support the superior court’s finding 2.3 that “Defendant(s)
has/have not: [X] paid the past due rent.” Br. of Appellant at 29 (quoting CP at 289). They contend
that the issue of outstanding rent was never decided by the superior court. We question whether
this finding has any consequence (or whether it was just a product of a pre-printed form). But if it
means anything, it is limited, and substantial evidence appears to support it. Evidence submitted
(by both parties) supports the conclusion that some amount of rent had not been paid, including
Hailey Jorgensen’s declarations where she stated that she fell behind on rent and needed to apply
for rental assistance three times in order to back-pay their rent for the period of December 2021
through June 2023; Jackson’s and Scott’s declarations that stated that the Jorgensens stopped
regularly paying rent in December 2021; and a copy of a rental assistance check from February
2022. 29
No. 60448-5-II

Other Sections in This Document (909)

Full Text