[WSBARP] Two Suits or One?

[Rob Wilson-Hoss]

          I don't have much time to think about it but if you need to throw
something at the wall, try arguing that your client has a vested right in
the properties already (but there is that bit about the rights of the PR: at
least this will get you to an argument that your client should be able to
determine the outcome if you get in before the transfer happens): 

 

11.04.250. When real estate vests--Rights of heirs

          When a person dies seized of lands, tenements or hereditaments, or
any right thereto or entitled to any interest therein in fee or for the life
of another, his or her title shall vest immediately in his or her heirs or
devisees, subject to his or her debts, family allowance, expenses of
administration, and any other charges for which such real estate is liable
under existing laws. No administration of the estate of such decedent, and
no decree of distribution or other finding or order of any court shall be
necessary in any case to vest such title in the heirs or devisees, but the
same shall vest in the heirs or devisees instantly upon the death of such
decedent: PROVIDED, That no person shall be deemed a devisee until the will
has been probated. The title and right to possession of such lands,
tenements, or hereditaments so vested in such heirs or devisees, together
with the rents, issues, and profits thereof, shall be good and valid against
all persons claiming adversely to the claims of any such heirs, or devisees,
excepting only the personal representative when appointed, and persons
lawfully claiming under such personal representative; and any one or more of
such heirs or devisees, or their grantees, jointly or severally, may sue for
and recover their respective shares or interests in any such lands,
tenements, or hereditaments and the rents, issues, and profits thereof,
whether letters testamentary or of administration be granted or not, from
any person except the personal representative and those lawfully claiming
under such personal representative.

 

 

 

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-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com
[mailto:wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com] On Behalf Of Clark, Catherine
Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2014 2:50 PM
To: WSBA Real Property Listserv
Subject: [WSBARP] Two Suits or One?

 

Listmates:

 

I have been recently hired to represent the sole beneficiary of an estate
for which probate was initiated approximately 6 weeks ago. The personal
representative has signed two purchase and sale agreements for the sale of
two properties identified in the will and specifically devised to my client.
The client does not agree that these properties should be sold. Notice to
creditors has gone out, but it does not appear that the notice has been
published. Thus, the four-month creditor's claim period has not expired if
in fact it has been initiated. Counsel for the personal representative has
withdrawn and thus she is operating as an unrepresented individual.

 

One property is located in King County and the other in Pierce County. My
sense is that I initiate two suits, one in each county, to restrain each
independent transaction.  My other inclination is to record a lis pendens in
each county asserting the claim to title by my client. Seems to me that in
order to do that I need a separate lawsuit in each County.

 

The other option is to pursue restraining orders restraining each
transaction and not record a lis pendens. My challenge there is that I know
the title company for one transaction (which is not listed in the MLS) and
for the other transaction I only know the listing agent which is listed in
the MLS.

 

Which we would you go on this?

 

All responses appreciated.

 

Thank you

 

Catherine C. Clark

Law Office of Catherine C. Clark PLLC

701 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4105

Seattle, WA  98104

Phone:  (206) 838-2528

Fax: (206) 374-3003

Email:  cat at loccc.com

 

I have dictated this email using Dragon voice recognition software. Please
excuse any errors as it learns my voice.

 

NOTICE: The information contained in this electronic information
transmission is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, or the
employee or agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient,
you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination, distribution or copying
of this communication is prohibited.  If you received this communication in
error, please immediately notify the sender by telephone at (206) 838-2528.
Thank you.

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20141204/0d85cfbd/attachment.html>