because of circumstances beyond their control, Le., not receiving invoices until
September 18 and October 1, 2013. A final full and specific statement was sent within a
reasonable time after the final invoices were obtained." CP at 53. The superior court
remanded the matter for entry ofjudgment and awarded reasonable attorney fees and
costs to Madison.
On Apri118, 2014, Ms. Goodeill requested discretionary review from this court. A
commissioner of this court denied Ms. Goodeill's motion. On September 3, Ms. Goodeill
moved this court to modifY the commissioner's ruling. This court granted Ms. GoodeiWs
motion to modifY and granted discretionary review.
ANALYSIS
1. Whether the superior court correctly found that DavisPro's delay in submitting its
invoices to Madison constituted "circumstances beyond the landlord's control"
under RCW 59.18.280
a. Standard ofReview
RCW 12.36.055(1) provides: "The appeal from a small claims judgment or
decision shall be de novo upon the record of the case, as entered by the district court."
Such reviews are controlled by CRLJ 73 and CRLJ 75. 3 See RALJ 1.1(b). The superior
3 Despite the 2001 amendment ofRCW 12.36.055, both CRLJ 72(b) and CRLJ 75
9
No. 32442-7-III
Goodeill v. Madison Real Estate
court conducts a de novo review ofthe district court record, generally reading the exhibits
and the transcribed testimony earlier considered by the small claims court. See generally
CRLJ 75(c). Pursuant to CR 52, the superior court thereafter enters findings of fact and
conclusions oflaw. See CR I; CR 81(a).
Appellate courts generally review a superior court's findings of fact for substantial