Skip to main content

Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 850318.pdf

Citation
Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 850318.pdf
Jurisdiction
Washington (state)
Source verification
official_capture_completeness_unverified

Related Parts of This Source

Full Text

1,719 chars
matter, the Division II panel concluded that the housing authority had only

provided 10 days’ notice to Asentista and that, pursuant to Section 4024 of the

CARES Act, he was entitled to 30 days’ notice. In so concluding, the panel relied

12 The Housing Authority urges us to rely on an informal question and answer document

drafted by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and
discussing certain provisions of the CARES Act. HUD, CDBG EVICTION MORATORIUM Q&AS 2-3
(2020),
https://www.hud.gov/sites/dfiles/CPD/documents/CDBG_Eviction_Moratorium_QAs_2020_05_18
_FINAL.pdf [https://perma.cc/AL3V-N6GN] That document was created after the CARES Act was
enacted.
We do not give this informal document substantial deference. There is no indication that
such document was created through a formal process. Furthermore, other than being consistent
with the plain meaning analysis above and drafted by an entity with a special expertise in the
matter herein, it is not significantly persuasive.

23
For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.
No. 85031-8-I/24

on our decision in Pinzon and the CRS report, discussed supra. Asentista, slip

op. at 6-10.

For the reasons previously stated herein, we respectfully disagree with

Division II’s reasoning and decision in Asentista.

F

Section 4024 of the CARES Act requires 30 days’ notice only for evictions

stemming from nonpayment of rent. Congress clearly intended that the

subsections of Section 4024 be interpreted as one, and when read as such, such

is the unambiguous plain meaning that follows. The economic context of the

CARES Act’s other provisions and persuasive decisional authority from other