[SPAM] Re: [WSBARP] "Nuisance or annoyance" -- what is "annoyance"?
Sandra Bates Gay
sgay at sbglaw-wa.com
Tue Aug 5 16:51:01 PDT 2014
I agree! Rob's analysis is thorough, convincing and I plan to plagiarize!
Thank you Rob.
Sandi Gay
On Aug 5, 2014, at 7:32 PM, "Brian K. Gerst" <brian.gerst at landerholm.com>
wrote:
Nicely done!
Sent from my iPhone
On Aug 5, 2014, at 4:09 PM, "Rob Wilson-Hoss" <rob at hctc.com> wrote:
Eric,
Ha, ha. For guidance about how to interpret "annoyance, start
with the recent Chiwawa decision, which includes,
13 Thus, our primary objective in contract interpretation is determining
the drafter’s intent.
<http://www.westlaw.com/Link/Document/FullText?findType=Y&serNum=199910176
1&pubNum=661&originationContext=document&vr=3.0&rs=cblt1.0&transitionType=
DocumentItem&contextData=(sc.Search)> Hollis v. Garwall, Inc., 137 Wash.2d
683, 696, 974 P.2d 836 (1999);
<http://www.westlaw.com/Link/Document/FullText?findType=Y&serNum=199708796
2&pubNum=661&originationContext=document&vr=3.0&rs=cblt1.0&transitionType=
DocumentItem&contextData=(sc.Search)> Riss, 131 Wash.2d at 623, 934 P.2d
669;
<http://www.westlaw.com/Link/Document/FullText?findType=Y&serNum=199314376
4&pubNum=661&originationContext=document&vr=3.0&rs=cblt1.0&transitionType=
DocumentItem&contextData=(sc.Search)> Mains Farm, 121 Wash.2d at 815, 854
P.2d 1072. “While interpretation of the covenant is a question of law, the
drafter’s intent is a question of fact.”
<http://www.westlaw.com/Link/Document/FullText?findType=Y&serNum=201780745
0&pubNum=4645&originationContext=document&vr=3.0&rs=cblt1.0&transitionType
=DocumentItem&contextData=(sc.Search)> Ross v. Bennett, 148 Wash.App. 40,
49, 203 P.3d 383 (2009) (citing
<http://www.westlaw.com/Link/Document/FullText?findType=Y&serNum=201089454
8&pubNum=4645&originationContext=document&vr=3.0&rs=cblt1.0&transitionType
=DocumentItem&contextData=(sc.Search)> Wimberly, 136 Wash.App. at 336, 149
P.3d 402). “But where reasonable minds could reach but one conclusion,
questions of fact may be determined as a matter of law.”
<http://www.westlaw.com/Link/Document/FullText?findType=Y&serNum=201780745
0&pubNum=4645&originationContext=document&vr=3.0&rs=cblt1.0&transitionType
=DocumentItem&contextData=(sc.Search)> Id. at 49–50, 203 P.3d 383 (citing
<http://www.westlaw.com/Link/Document/FullText?findType=Y&serNum=200637517
3&pubNum=4645&originationContext=document&vr=3.0&rs=cblt1.0&transitionType
=DocumentItem&contextData=(sc.Search)> Owen v. Burlington N. Santa Fe
R.R., 153 Wash.2d 780, 788, 108 P.3d 1220 (2005)). In determining the
drafter’s intent, we give covenant language “its ordinary and common use”
and will not construe a term in such a way “so as to defeat the plain and
obvious meaning.”
<http://www.westlaw.com/Link/Document/FullText?findType=Y&serNum=199314376
4&pubNum=661&originationContext=document&vr=3.0&rs=cblt1.0&transitionType=
DocumentItem&contextData=(sc.Search)> Mains Farm, 121 Wash.2d at 816, 854
P.2d 1072;
<http://www.westlaw.com/Link/Document/FullText?findType=Y&serNum=199708796
2&pubNum=661&originationContext=document&vr=3.0&rs=cblt1.0&transitionType=
DocumentItem&contextData=(sc.Search)> Riss, 131 Wash.2d at 623, 934 P.2d
669. We examine the language of the restrictive covenant and consider the
instrument in its entirety.
<http://www.westlaw.com/Link/Document/FullText?findType=Y&serNum=199910176
1&pubNum=661&originationContext=document&vr=3.0&rs=cblt1.0&transitionType=
DocumentItem&contextData=(sc.Search)> Hollis, 137 Wash.2d at 694, 974 P.2d
836 (quoting
<http://www.westlaw.com/Link/Document/FullText?findType=Y&serNum=199423289
5&pubNum=661&originationContext=document&vr=3.0&rs=cblt1.0&transitionType=
DocumentItem&contextData=(sc.Search)> Mountain Park Homeowners Ass’n v.
Tydings, 125 Wash.2d 337, 344, 883 P.2d 1383 (1994));
<http://www.westlaw.com/Link/Document/FullText?findType=Y&serNum=201089454
8&pubNum=4645&originationContext=document&vr=3.0&rs=cblt1.0&transitionType
=DocumentItem&contextData=(sc.Search)> Wimberly, 136 Wash.App. at 336, 149
P.3d 402. The lack of an express term with the inclusion of other similar
terms is evidence of the drafters’ intent. See
<http://www.westlaw.com/Link/Document/FullText?findType=Y&serNum=196512262
8&pubNum=661&originationContext=document&vr=3.0&rs=cblt1.0&transitionType=
DocumentItem&contextData=(sc.Search)> Burton v. Douglas County, 65 Wash.2d
619, 622, 399 P.2d 68 (1965). “Extrinsic evidence is ... used to
illuminate what was written, not what was intended to be written.”
<http://www.westlaw.com/Link/Document/FullText?findType=Y&serNum=199910176
1&pubNum=661&originationContext=document&vr=3.0&rs=cblt1.0&transitionType=
DocumentItem&contextData=(sc.Search)> Hollis, 137 Wash.2d at 697, 974 P.2d
836. We, however, do not consider extrinsic “[e]vidence that would vary,
contradict or modify the written word” or “show an intention independent
of the instrument.”
<http://www.westlaw.com/Link/Document/FullText?findType=Y&serNum=199910176
1&pubNum=661&originationContext=document&vr=3.0&rs=cblt1.0&transitionType=
DocumentItem&contextData=(sc.Search)> Id. at 695, 974 P.2d 836.
Then the Court interprets a set of covenants, concluding,
"reasonable minds could reach but one conclusion." The first dissent
refers to this as an "incredible supposition." The second dissent says
that the majority (apparently intentionally) ignores both the facts and
the law.
So, you want an interpretation of "annoyance?" How about
comparing your facts to how practitioners feel after reading Chiwawa, for
a start?
Arf, arf.
Rob
Robert D. Wilson-Hoss
Hoss & Wilson-Hoss, LLP
236 West Birch Street
Shelton, WA 98584
360 426-2999
www.hossandwilson-hoss.com
rob at hctc.com
This message is intended solely for the use of the addressee and may
contain information that is privileged, confidential, and exempt from
disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the addressee, you are
hereby notified that any use, distribution, or copying of this message is
strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify
us by reply e-mail or by telephone (call us collect at the number listed
above) and immediately delete this message and any and all of its
attachments. Thank you.
This office does debt collection and this e-mail may be an attempt to
collect a debt, Any information obtained will be used for that purpose.
To the extent the Federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (15 U.S.C. §
1692) applies this firm is acting as a debt collector for the
condominium/homeowners' association named above to collect a debt owed to
it. Any information obtained will be used for collection purposes. You
have the right to seek advice of legal counsel.
From: wsbarp-owner at lists.wsbarppt.com
[mailto:wsbarp-owner at lists.wsbarppt.com] On Behalf Of Eric Nelsen
Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2014 3:50 PM
To: WSBA Real Property listserve (wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com)
Subject: [WSBARP] "Nuisance or annoyance" -- what is "annoyance"?
CC&Rs state:
"Nuisance. No noxious or offensive activity shall be carried on upon any
Lot; nor shall anything be done thereon which is or may become an
annoyance or a nuisance."
Is there any guidance on how "annoyance" differs from nuisance in this
context? Nuisance is pretty well defined in case law, but "annoyance"
sounds to me like a lower threshold or standard.
Sincerely,
Eric C. Nelsen
SAYRE LAW OFFICES, PLLC
1320 University St
Seattle WA 98101-2837
phone 206-625-0092
fax 206-625-9040
===============================
- To contact the list administrator, send a message to:
<mailto:webmaster at wsbarppt.com> webmaster at wsbarppt.com
- To unsubscribe, send a new message to: imail at lists.wsbarppt.com, with
the following in the body of the message: unsubscribe wsbarp - OR - send a
message to webmaster at wsbarppt.com asking that you be removed from the
wsbarp list.
Information provided on this list should not be considered legal advice.
As with all lists - let the reader beware! No warranties or
representations are made as to the accuracy of any information provided.
All opinions and comments in this message represent the views of the
author and do not necessarily have the endorsement of the Washington State
Bar Association nor its officers or agents.
===============================
- To contact the list administrator, send a message to:
<mailto:webmaster at wsbarppt.com> webmaster at wsbarppt.com
- To unsubscribe, send a new message to: imail at lists.wsbarppt.com, with
the following in the body of the message: unsubscribe wsbarp - OR - send a
message to webmaster at wsbarppt.com asking that you be removed from the
wsbarp list.
Information provided on this list should not be considered legal advice.
As with all lists - let the reader beware! No warranties or
representations are made as to the accuracy of any information provided.
All opinions and comments in this message represent the views of the
author and do not necessarily have the endorsement of the Washington State
Bar Association nor its officers or agents.
----------------------------
This e-mail message (including attachments) is for the sole use of the
intended recipient(s). It contains confidential, proprietary or legally
protected information which is the property of Landerholm, P.S. or its
clients. Any unauthorized disclosure or use of the contents of this
e-mail is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error,
notify the sender immediately and destroy all copies of the original
message.
----------------------------
===============================
- To contact the list administrator, send a message to:
webmaster at wsbarppt.com
- To unsubscribe, send a new message to: imail at lists.wsbarppt.com, with
the following in the body of the message: unsubscribe wsbarp - OR - send a
message to webmaster at wsbarppt.com asking that you be removed from the
wsbarp list.
Information provided on this list should not be considered legal advice.
As with all lists - let the reader beware! No warranties or
representations are made as to the accuracy of any information provided.
All opinions and comments in this message represent the views of the
author and do not necessarily have the endorsement of the Washington State
Bar Association nor its officers or agents.
===============================
- To contact the list administrator, send a message to:
webmaster at wsbarppt.com
- To unsubscribe, send a new message to: imail at lists.wsbarppt.com, with
the following in the body of the message: unsubscribe wsbarp - OR - send a
message to webmaster at wsbarppt.com asking that you be removed from the
wsbarp list.
Information provided on this list should not be considered legal advice.
As with all lists - let the reader beware! No warranties or
representations are made as to the accuracy of any information provided.
All opinions and comments in this message represent the views of the
author and do not necessarily have the endorsement of the Washington State
Bar Association nor its officers or agents.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: winmail.dat
Type: application/ms-tnef
Size: 15914 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20140805/ac6e00d5/winmail.dat>
More information about the WSBARP
mailing list