Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 389189_pub.pdf
- Citation
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 389189_pub.pdf
- Jurisdiction
- Washington (state)
- Source verification
- official_capture_completeness_unverified
- Original Source
- https://www.courts.wa.gov/opinions/pdf/389189_pub.pdf ↗
Related Parts of This Source
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 389189_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 389189_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 389189_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 389189_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 389189_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 389189_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 389189_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 389189_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 389189_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 389189_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 389189_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 389189_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 389189_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 389189_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 389189_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 389189_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 389189_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 389189_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 389189_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 389189_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 389189_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 389189_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 389189_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 389189_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 389189_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 389189_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 389189_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 389189_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 389189_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 389189_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 389189_pub.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 389189_pub.pdf
Full Text
1,716 chars9 Ms. Daniels contends that, even if K&H found Ms. Daniels’s requested accommodation vague, objectionable, or flatly unreasonable, K&H should have engaged Ms. Daniels in a dialogue to seek clarification or explore other possible solutions. We acknowledge there is a split among legal authorities on whether such a dialogue is required by the relevant statutes, or merely encouraged. See Joint Statement at 7 (explaining that landlords “should” open a dialogue with tenants who propose an unreasonable accommodation, and that if there is an alternative accommodation that would meet a tenant’s needs, the landlord “must” grant it); compare Howard v. HMK Holdings, LLC, 988 F.3d 1185, 1193-94 (9th Cir. 2021), and Groner, 250 F.3d at 1047, with Douglas, 884 A.2d at 1122 & n.22, 1143-44, and Jankowski Lee & Assocs., 91 F.3d at 896. At this juncture, we decline to endorse either side of this split, because we conclude the reasonableness of Ms. Daniels’s accommodation should have reached a jury either way. 32 For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/. No. 38918-9-III Kiemle & Hagood Co. v. Daniels ATTORNEY FEES AND COSTS Ms. Daniels asks for an award of attorney fees and costs, citing RCW 59.18.290 and RAP 18.1. This request is premature. If Ms. Daniels ultimately prevails on remand, she may request attorney fees, to and including fees and costs associated with her appeal. See Faciszewski, 187 Wn.2d at 324. CONCLUSION The trial court prematurely issued final judgment in favor of K&H after granting the request for writ of restitution at the show cause hearing. Because there are genuine issues of material fact as to whether Ms. Daniels is subject to eviction