Northwest Real Estate Law Blog : Northwest Real Estate Lawyer & Attorney : Davis Wright Tremaine Law Firm : Land Use, Development, Commercial Property : Seattle, Portland, Alaska, Washington, Oregon

 Authored by:  Alan Middleton

The Huntingtons unwittingly built their home, well, and garage entirely on property owned by their neighbor, Noel Proctor. When he learned of the true boundary between the properties, Proctor sued to eject the Huntingtons. The trial court refused to require the Huntingtons to remove their home. Instead, it required Proctor to deed to the Huntingtons the acre underlying the improvements (the acre represented approximately 3.3% of Proctor's parcel) and accept in return payment for the value of the land. A very sharply divided Washington Supreme Court affirmed in a 5-4 decision. Copies of the majority and dissenting opinions can be found here: [opinions]

Continue Reading...

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Authored by:  Lloyd Chee

In Substitute Senate Bill 6544, the 2010 legislature extended the time period for submitting final plats for approval by cities and counties from five years to seven years.  This extension went into effect on June 10, 2010, and sunsets on December 31, 2014.  It appears to apply to all preliminary plats approved prior to the effective date that have not yet expired under the previous provisions of RCW 58.17.140.  This legislation also extends the period in which lots in final plats are protected as a valid land use to seven years (up from five years) for those final plats filed for record with the county auditor on or before December 31, 2014.  Click here to read the full text of the legislation.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Authored by:  Alan Middleton

In a 5-4 decision, the Washington Supreme Court held that a 25-year lease subject to the Manufactured/Mobile Home Landlord-Tenant Act (MHLTA), RCW 59.20, does not violate the MHLTA's prohibition against restrictions on assignment, RCW 59.20.060(2)(d), .073(1), if the lease provides that the lease term is shortened to one or two years in the event of assignment. The lease did not otherwise limit a tenant's right to assign. The owner had offered 25-year leases to initial tenants at a low rental to obtain full occupancy of a new development. Although the development was not viable if all owners held their leases for the full 25-year term, the owner calculated that most owners would assign their leases before the 25-year term expired. The Court did not address the tenants' alternative argument that such leases violated the Consumer Protection Act, RCW 19.86, as the Court of Appeals had remanded the CPA claim for further factual findings. The majority and dissenting opinions in case, Little Mountain Estates Tenants Ass'n v. Little Mountain Estates MHC LLC, Case No. 82574-2, can be found here: [www.dwtrealestatelawnw.com/uploads/file/Little Mountain Dissent.pdf ; and www.dwtrealestatelawnw.com/uploads/file/Little Mountain Majority.pdf]

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link