Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 389189_pub.pdf

Related Parts of This Source

1,743 chars

the obviousness of the condition. This matter should have been set for trial rather than

summarily resolved.

BACKGROUND

The parties’ lease

Phoebe Daniels leased an apartment from K&H. She began with an 11-month

lease term expiring in May 2021. The parties later agreed to a lease renewal, set to expire

on February 28, 2022. The lease required Ms. Daniels to keep her apartment “clean and

sanitary.” Clerk’s Papers (CP) at 22, 65. Addendums regarding mold and bed bugs

contemplated specific cleaning routines, including removing clutter, vacuuming, and

dusting. The lease also required Ms. Daniels to properly dispose of garbage “at least

2
For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.

No. 38918-9-III
Kiemle & Hagood Co. v. Daniels

weekly.” Id.

K&H’s notices to Ms. Daniels

On August 24, 2020, K&H issued the first of seven notices to Ms. Daniels,

alleging she had violated her cleaning obligations. Four of the notices demanded

Ms. Daniels comply with her lease conditions or vacate. See id. at 101, 106, 111, 116.

Two of the notices directed her to cure the lease violations, or the landlord would enter

the property and conduct remedial work at cost. See id. at 122, 127. The final notification

directed Ms. Daniels to quit and vacate the premises. See id. at 134.

Each notice provided detailed descriptions, citing recent inspections by

K&H employees. According to the notices, furniture and boxes were stacked inside

Ms. Daniels’s residence, blocking ingress and egress; garbage had not been disposed of;

spills and dirty paper towels had accumulated on the floor; and there was an excessive

amount of personal property throughout the unit, including in the kitchen and bathroom,