Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 59088-3-II Published Opinion.pdf

Citation: Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — D2 59088-3-II Published Opinion.pdf
Jurisdiction: Washington (state)
Source verification: official_capture_completeness_unverified
Original Source: https://www.courts.wa.gov/opinions/pdf/D2%2059088-3-II%20Published%20Opinion.pdf ↗

Related Parts of This Source

Full Text

1,373 chars

Notwithstanding (a) of this subsection, expenses incurred during the administration
of the estate have priority over the secured claim of any creditor obtaining or
consenting to the appointment of the receiver.

RCW 7.60.230(1)(b).

Receiverships are an equitable remedy. Bero, 195 Wn. App. at 179. Courts have broad

discretion over receiverships and are afforded wide latitude in fashioning relief under their

equitable powers. Id.; Friend v. Friend, 92 Wn. App. 799, 803, 964 P.2d 1219 (1998), review

denied, 137 Wn.2d 1030 (1999); RCW 7.60.055.8 Because receiverships are an equitable remedy

and courts have broad discretion, we review superior court rulings “regarding the receivership that

order turnover, disallow claims, and enter judgment, for an abuse of discretion.” Applied

Restoration, 28 Wn. App. 2d at 891; accord In re Receivership of Castle Walls, ___ Wn. App. 2d

___, 545 P.3d 816, 820 (2024) (stating “‘[c]hapter 7.60 RCW gives the trial court broad discretion

over receiverships’ and, ‘because a receivership is an equitable remedy,’ this court reviews the

trial court’s decisions to both order turnover and enter judgment pursuant to a receivership under

an abuse of discretion standard” (alteration in original) (quoting Bero, 195 Wn. App. at 175, 179),

pet. for rev. filed in No. 1030185 (May 1, 2024)).

8
RCW 7.60.055(1) provides in part: