Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 361896_pub.pdf

Related Parts of This Source

1,775 chars

court should not interfere with the bargain reached by the parties. United Properties Co.

v. Walgreen Properties, Inc., 82 P.3d at 539. Courts may not rewrite obligations that the

parties have freely bargained for themselves. United Properties Co. v. Walgreen

Properties, Inc., 82 P.3d at 539 (2003). Equity jurisdiction has never given the judiciary

a roving commission to do whatever it wishes in the name of fairness or public welfare.

6
For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.

No. 36189-6-III
Borton & Sons, Inc. v. Burbank Properties, LLC (dissent)

United Properties Co. v. Walgreen Properties, Inc., 82 P.3d at 541 (2003). The decision

of which of two profit-seeking parties is more deserving to prevail is not within the

province of the courts. United Properties Co. v. Walgreen Properties, Inc., 82 P.3d at

544 (2003).

A majority of courts that have dealt with the issue on appeal conclude that special

circumstances may warrant a court in granting equitable relief against a lessee’s failure or

delay in giving notice to renew an option in its lease. Wharf Restaurant, Inc. v. Port of

Seattle, 24 Wn. App. at 610-11 (1979); 49 AM. JUR. 2D Landlord and Tenant § 154

(2018). Washington courts apply the same rules with regard to an option to renew a lease

and an option to purchase the property. Wharf Restaurant, Inc. v. Port of Seattle, 24 Wn.

App. 601 (1979); Cornish College of the Arts v. 1000 Virginia Ltd. Partnership, 158 Wn.

App. 203 (2010).

Washington law follows the rule allowing some relief from strictly applying

contract terms. Forfeitures are not favored in law and are never enforced in equity unless

the right thereto is so clear as to permit no denial. Hyrkas v. Knight, 64 Wn.2d 733, 734,