Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Josephinium Associates v. Kahli, 45 P.3d 627 (2002)

Citation
Josephinium Associates v. Kahli, 45 P.3d 627 (2002)
Parent Document
Josephinium Associates v. Kahli, 45 P.3d 627 (2002)
Jurisdiction
Washington (state)
Effective Date
2002-05-06

Other Sections in This Document (57)

Full Text

765 chars
Finally, Kahli contends the Josephinium's accommodation efforts were inadequate because after the eviction notice was served, *634 her requests for meetings were ignored. She contends the Josephinium's duty to accommodate her continued to the date of actual eviction, and that the court erred by ignoring events after the notice. Kahli relies upon Radecki v. Joura,[35] and Roe v. Housing Authority of City of Boulder,[36] but neither case so holds. Radecki concerns the question of knowledge of a disability, not its reasonable accommodation.[37]Roe holds that accommodation must be attempted before housing can be denied.[38] Neither case discussed a landlord's duty after accommodation has been offered and has failed, but physical eviction has not yet occurred.