Skip to main content

Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 361659_pub.pdf

Citation
Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 361659_pub.pdf
Jurisdiction
Washington (state)
Source
Official source

Full Text

1,741 chars
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON
DIVISION THREE

THOMAS SILVER, an individual, and all )
those similarly situated, ) No. 36165-9-III
)
Appellant, )
)
v. )
) PUBLISHED OPINION
RUDEEN MANAGEMENT COMPANY, )
INC., a Washington corporation, )
)
Respondent. )

KORSMO, J. — Thomas Silver appeals from the dismissal at summary judgment of

his class action against a property management company. We affirm the trial court’s

determination that his claim was barred by the statute of limitations.

FACTS

Mr. Silver rented an apartment managed by respondent Rudeen Management

Company for about 40 months. Upon entering into the tenancy, Mr. Silver paid Rudeen a

$300 damage deposit. He vacated the premises June 30, 2015, after giving timely notice

of his intention. On that same day, Rudeen provided Silver a “preliminary” “Deposit

Disposition” statement. The disposition claimed Silver owed $2,516.00 for excessive
For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.

No. 36165-9-III
Silver v. Rudeen Mgmt. Co.

wear and tear. On August 18, 2015, Rudeen sent Silver a “final” “Deposit Disposition”

statement claiming a revised amount of $2,281.35 for excessive wear and tear.

Rudeen sometime thereafter began efforts to collect on its claim. Silver responded

by filing this action. On August 10, 2017, he filed a complaint for damages against

Rudeen. The complaint asserted the existence of a class of plaintiffs and a single cause

of action: a contention that Rudeen had violated the Residential Landlord-Tenant Act of

1973 (RLTA), ch. 59.18 RCW, by not providing within twenty-one days a final statement

concerning the damage deposit pursuant to RCW 59.18.280. Plaintiff requested that the