Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 901791.pdf
- Citation
- Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 901791.pdf
- Jurisdiction
- Washington (state)
- Source verification
- official_capture_completeness_unverified
- Original Source
- https://www.courts.wa.gov/opinions/pdf/901791.pdf ↗
Related Parts of This Source
- Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 901791.pdf
- Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 901791.pdf
- Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 901791.pdf
- Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 901791.pdf
- Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 901791.pdf
- Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 901791.pdf
- Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 901791.pdf
- Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 901791.pdf
- Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 901791.pdf
- Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 901791.pdf
- Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 901791.pdf
- Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 901791.pdf
- Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 901791.pdf
- Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 901791.pdf
- Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 901791.pdf
- Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 901791.pdf
- Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 901791.pdf
- Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 901791.pdf
- Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 901791.pdf
- Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 901791.pdf
- Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 901791.pdf
- Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 901791.pdf
- Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 901791.pdf
- Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 901791.pdf
- Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 901791.pdf
- Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 901791.pdf
- Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 901791.pdf
Full Text
1,727 charsconsistent with this opinion, including an award of costs and attorney fees to Tison.
16
Western Plaza, LLC v. Tison, No. 90179-1
WE CONCUR.
17
Western Plaza, LLC v. Tison, No. 90179-1
Yu, J. (dissenting)
No. 90179-1
YU, J. (dissenting)-! agree with the majority that a rent cap provision is not
prohibited by the Manufactured/Mobile Home Landlord-Tenant Act (MHL TA),
chapter 59.20 RCW. I also agree that the MHLTA allows a landlord to increase
rent with proper notice and procedures. However, I depart from the majority in its
disregard of the statute of frauds for the purpose of reaching a particular result in
this case. Nothing in the MHLTA creates or implies an exemption from the statute
of frauds, which applies to leases of real property. Because Norma Tison's lease
does not comply with the statute of frauds, its specific provisions are subject to
modification upon the lease's annual renewal and the rent cap in this case was not
an enforceable provision that carried forward in perpetuity. I respectfully dissent.
ANALYSIS
Under RCW 59.04.010, leases "shall be legal and valid for any term or
period not exceeding one year, without acknowledgment, witnesses or seals."
Conversely, to be enforceable for a period greater than one year, a lease must be
Western Plaza, LLC v. Tison, No. 90179-1
Yu, J. (dissenting)
acknowledged. 1 Labor Hall Ass 'n v. Danielsen, 24 Wn.2d 75, 88-89, 163 P .2d 167
(1945); Stevenson v. Parker, 25 Wn. App. 639, 642, 608 P.2d 1263 (1980);