[WSBARP] Notice Sent To Correct Address In Documents But Other Side Moves And Claims A Defense Of 'We Never Got It...."

[Rob Rowley]

I have been looking around for it and can’t find it but I vaguely remember
a court of appeals case where the court slapped up the party who raised the
defense of ‘I didn't get the notice because I moved and didn't inform the
other party that I was moving.’  I believe it was in the context of a
certified real mailing.



I have a case where I represent the party who exercised an option to
purchase and the notice was sent to the correct address in the notice and a
certified return receipt was returned but with a different signature than
the other party.  Nobody thinks anything of the situation until opposing
counsel appears and claims that his side never got *timely* notice of the
exercise of option because his client moved and obviously somebody else
signed for the notice.



I'm working up a partial summary judgment that the option was properly
exercised.





Please note that effective May 15, 2015, my new address is 7 South Howard
St., Suite 218, Spokane, WA 99201.  All other contact information remains
the same.



*Robert R. Rowley* | Attorney at Law

7 S. Howard St, Suite 218

Spokane, WA  99201

Telephone: (509) 252-5074

Mobile: (509) 994-1143

Facsimile: (509) 928-3084

Email: rob at rowleylegal.com

Web Site: www.rowleylegal.com



Practice concentrated on business, real estate and general legal matters in
Washington and Idaho.



<https://www.facebook.com/rowleylegal>
<https://www.linkedin.com/pub/rob-rowley/11/172/b20>
<https://twitter.com/ROBERTRROWLEY>
<http://www.yelp.com/biz/robert-r-rowley-spokane>



NOTICE: The contents of this message and any attachments may be protected
by the attorney-client privilege, work product doctrine or other applicable
protections.  If you are not the intended recipient or have received this
message in error, please notify the sender and promptly delete the
message.  Thank you for your assistance.

DISCLAIMER: You should recognize that responses provided by e-mail means
are akin to ordinary telephone or face-to-face conversations and do not
reflect the level of factual or legal inquiry or analysis which would be
applied in the case of a formal legal opinion. A formal opinion may very
well reach a different conclusion.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20150819/c636006a/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 20360 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20150819/c636006a/image001.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image003.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 1317 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20150819/c636006a/image003.gif>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image004.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 1295 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20150819/c636006a/image004.gif>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image005.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 1351 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20150819/c636006a/image005.gif>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image008.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 2555 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20150819/c636006a/image008.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image009.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 939 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20150819/c636006a/image009.jpg>