[WSBARP] unlawful detainer judgment

[Valentine, Gretchen (TRGC)]

Craig –
I don’t practice in this area, but it’s possible you don’t need a cite for it.  I think “unlawful detainer” means a tenant that unlawfully detains the property from the landlord.  After the tenant vacates, there’s no ‘unlawful detainer’.  Former English teacher, can you tell?  Also, checking RCW 59.18, unlawful detainer in Washington only applies to residential transactions.  See RCW 48.59.010.
Have a good weekend,
Gretchen Valentine

Gretchen Valentine | NW Regional Underwriting Counsel
Title Resources
Phone: 206-962-7744 |


From: wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com [mailto:wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com] On Behalf Of Craig Gourley
Sent: Friday, June 1, 2018 3:04 PM
To: wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com
Subject: [WSBARP] unlawful detainer judgment

Listmates, I know that when a tenant vacates the property priortothe show cause, the UD action is no longer valid and tje action must be converted to a money due or breach suit if you want a judgment. What I don't know is the cite for why that is true. Anyone know the cite  for this? Also does it only apply to residential or is it the same for commercial? Thanks in advance for your wisdom.



Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone
BEWARE OF CYBER-FRAUD - Before wiring any funds, call the intended recipient at a number you know is valid to confirm the instructions and be very wary of any request to change wire instructions you already received.

This email may be confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify us immediately and delete this copy from your system.

*** In our ongoing Focus on your security we have changed our Encryption provider to Proofpoint Encryption. This may require you to create a new account ***
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20180601/a6ea513f/attachment.html>