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
- Original Source
- https://www.courts.wa.gov/opinions/pdf/850318.pdf ↗
Related Parts of This Source
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 850318.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 850318.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 850318.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 850318.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 850318.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 850318.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 850318.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 850318.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 850318.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 850318.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 850318.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 850318.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 850318.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 850318.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 850318.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 850318.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 850318.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 850318.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 850318.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 850318.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 850318.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 850318.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 850318.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 850318.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 850318.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 850318.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 850318.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 850318.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 850318.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 850318.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 850318.pdf
- Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 850318.pdf
Full Text
1,781 charsjurisdictions reinforce that interpretation. Adopting the alternative interpretation offered by the Amicus—that in the throes of the onset of a pandemic Congress initiated an expansive and permanent nationwide program of landlord and tenant eviction reform—would lead to unlikely and absurd results in rental housing. Thus, the plain meaning of the CARES Act is that it requires 30 days’ notice to vacate only for evictions stemming from nonpayment of rent. Accordingly, the superior court commissioner erred by denying the Housing Authority’s petition and dismissing its unlawful detainer action against the Knights. IV As a final matter, we recognize that the Knights, to our knowledge, have not received actual notice of this appeal. They did not submit any filings to the 24 For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/. No. 85031-8-I/25 superior court, appear in the proceedings therein, submit any filings to this court, or otherwise participate at any stage in this matter. It is undisputed that both the Housing Authority and this court sent notices to the Knights at their last known address, the rental unit from which the Housing Authority was seeking to evict them. However, it is unclear if the Knights actually received such notice.13 Nevertheless, it is well-established that the test for due process is not whether actual notice is received, but whether the notice was sent in a manner “reasonably calculated to reach the intended parties.” In re Saltis, 25 Wn. App. 214, 219, 607 P.2d 316 (1980) (citing Mullane v. Cent. Hanover Bank & Trust Co., 339 U.S. 306, 318, 70 S. Ct. 652, 94 L. Ed. 865 (1950) (“within the limits of practicability notice must be such as is reasonably calculated to reach interested