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

Related Parts of This Source

1,752 chars

of the show cause hearing. As previously explained, while a show cause hearing resolves

the preliminary question of who is entitled to possession of the premises during suit, it

does not necessarily resolve questions regarding the ultimate right to possession or other

remedies. Randy Reynolds, 193 Wn.2d at 157. Even if a landlord obtains preliminary

success through a writ of restitution, trial on the right of possession must be ordered

if the tenant raises genuine issues of material fact pertaining to a defense or set-off.

RCW 59.18.380.

1. K&H’s proof of grounds for eviction

Pursuant to the December 27 notice, K&H alleged at the show cause hearing that

Ms. Daniels was subject to eviction under RCW 59.18.650(2)(c). This provision provides

four possible bases for eviction: (1) waste, (2) nuisance, (3) unlawful activity that affects

the use and enjoyment of the premises, and (4) substantial or repeated and unreasonable

20
For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.

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

interference with the use and enjoyment of the premises by the landlord or neighbors.

The trial court issued judgment under the fourth clause of RCW 59.18.650(2)(c). This is

the only basis for eviction that K&H defends on appeal. We therefore focus our review

on whether Ms. Daniels should have been afforded a trial on this allegation.

The standard of review governing this inquiry is not well developed. In the recent

case of Tedford v. Guy, Division Two of this court stated we review a trial court’s

decision on whether to order a trial for abuse of discretion. 13 Wn. App. 2d 1, 16,

462 P.3d 869 (2020). But Tedford’s statement does not draw from the language of the