Skip to main content

Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 929785.pdf

Citation
Wash. Supreme Court published opinion — 929785.pdf
Jurisdiction
Washington (state)
Source verification
official_capture_completeness_unverified

Full Text

1,762 chars
Seattle Municipal Code (SMC) 22.206.160(C)(1)(e). Clerk's Papers (CP) at 1, 2, 14.

In accordance with that provision, the notice stated Landlords were terminating the

tenancy because "[Landlords] seek to possess the Property so that at least one

immediate family member (or, in the alternative, one of us) may occupy the [Seattle]

Property as a principal residence." Id. at 22. Landlords subsequently clarified that

Faciszewski's parents would be moving into the house so that Faciszewski could care

for his ailing father. Id. at 45-46; VTP (Aug. 12, 2014) at 3. Following his father's

-2-
For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.
Faciszewski, eta!. v. Brown, eta!., 92978-5

death, Faciszewski inclicated that only his mother planned to move into the house. CP

at46.

Because of an earlier dispute, Tenants believed that Landlords' stated reason was

a pretext. Id. 1 Tenants thus began researching Faciszewski's parents on the Internet.

Tenants learned the following facts regarding Faciszewski's mother: (1) she owned a

home in Colorado that was not listed for sale or for rent, id. at 46, 82-83; (2) she was
<

scheduled to teach a class at a Colorado center in the fall, id. at 46, 72-73; (3) she

volunteered at a Colorado hospital for many years and continued to do so, id. at 80-81;

and (4) she had not informed the center or the hospital of any plans to move, id. at 46,

80-81. Citing this information, Tenants complained to the City, and in response

Landlords filed with the City a certification of intent to carry out the stated reason.

Because the certification provided that "[Faciszewsld] or/and ... his mother" would

occupy the property, id. at 77 (emphasis added), Tenants continued to believe