recording was later considered by the jury, and the jury found Mr. Kipp guilty of the
charged offenses. Id. On appeal, the Kipp court applied a de novo review to the order
denying suppression, and reversed the trial court's order. Id. at 726-29, 733. In
determining that de novo review was appropriate, the Kipp court emphasized that the trial
court "made no credibility or other determinations for which its firsthand observation of
the proceedings better positioned it to make," and that the evidence before the trial court,
i.e., the stipulation to background facts and the 10-minute recording, did not present
issues of fact. Id. at 728.
Here, the trial court reviewed documentary evidence that established the relevant
timelines for what happened and when. The trial court was not called on to resolve issues
of fact concerning what happened and when. Rather, it was called on to determine, given
what happened and when, whether the landlord's failure to timely provide the statutory
notice was "beyond the landlord's control." Because there was no conflicting evidence
11
No. 32442-7-III
Goodeill v. Madison Real Estate
which the trial court reconciled to make this determination, our review of the trial court's
decision on this issue is de novo.
b. An improperly designated finding offact is treated as a conclusion oflaw
"If a determination concerns whether the evidence showed that something
occurred or existed, it is properly labeled a finding of fact, but if a determination is made
by a process of legal reasoning from, or interpretation of the legal significance of, the
evidentiary facts, it is a conclusion oflaw." Moulden & Sons, Inc. v. Osaka Landscaping