[WSBARP] Quiet Title Action and Boundary Line Agreements Pursuant to RCW 58.04.007

Law Office of Shaun Watchie Perry shaunwperry at swp-law.com
Tue Dec 8 15:32:35 PST 2020


Thank you!

*/Ms. Shaun Watchie Perry | Attorney at Law
Law Office of Shaun Watchie Perry
1325 Fourth Avenue, Suite 940 | Seattle, WA 98101
Tel +206.729.7442 | Fax + 206.260.1411 | www.swp-law.com/*

This e-mail is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to 
whom it is addressed and may contain confidential, privileged 
information. If the reader of this e-mail is not the addressee, please 
be advised that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this 
e-mail is strictly prohibited. If you receive this communication in 
error, please call immediately 206-729-7442 and return this e-mail to 
the above e-mail address and delete from your files.

On 12/8/2020 3:30 PM, Daniel Berner wrote:
>
> Link to the opinion: 
> http://www.courts.wa.gov/opinions/pdf/D2%2052949-1-II%20Unpublished%20Opinion.pdf 
> <http://www.courts.wa.gov/opinions/pdf/D2%2052949-1-II%20Unpublished%20Opinion.pdf>
>
> Division II. Appeal from Grays Harbor County Superior Court.
>
> *Daniel Berner*
>
> Attorney
>
> dberner at phillipsburgesslaw.com <mailto:dberner at phillipsburgesslaw.com> 
> |website <http://www.phillipsburgesslaw.com/>
>
> *Our offices are CLOSED to the public through December 14, 2020.*
>
>
> *WE RECENTLY MOVED: 111 21^st Ave SW, Olympia, WA 98501*| 360.742.3500 
> (Office) | 360.999.0306 (Cell)
>
> 915 S I Street, Tacoma, WA 98405 | 253.292.6640
>
> *
> **
>
> REAL ESTATE | LAND USE | ENVIRONMENTAL LAW*
>
> *From:* wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com 
> <wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com> *On Behalf Of *Law Office of Shaun 
> Watchie Perry
> *Sent:* Tuesday, December 8, 2020 3:22 PM
> *To:* wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com
> *Subject:* Re: [WSBARP] Quiet Title Action and Boundary Line 
> Agreements Pursuant to RCW 58.04.007
>
> Can you share the opinion?
>
> */Ms. Shaun Watchie Perry | Attorney at Law
> Law Office of Shaun Watchie Perry
> 1325 Fourth Avenue, Suite 940 | Seattle, WA 98101
> Tel +206.729.7442 | Fax + 206.260.1411 | www.swp-law.com 
> <https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.swp-law.com%2F&data=04%7C01%7Cdberner%40phillipsburgesslaw.com%7Ccf767284684b4ba6182208d89bd0fc2a%7Cc077a7b2deb6407e83db7b3b5823302e%7C1%7C0%7C637430669186767690%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000&sdata=FzR5HYDpDlp%2Fk2bvjivo4jiD4oZb6%2Fn1fZD19Pt6jV4%3D&reserved=0>/* 
>
>
> This e-mail is intended only for the use of the individual or entity 
> to whom it is addressed and may contain confidential, privileged 
> information. If the reader of this e-mail is not the addressee, please 
> be advised that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this 
> e-mail is strictly prohibited. If you receive this communication in 
> error, please call immediately 206-729-7442 and return this e-mail to 
> the above e-mail address and delete from your files.
>
> On 12/8/2020 3:09 PM, rob at hctc.com <mailto:rob at hctc.com> wrote:
>
>     And, serendipitously, see, Pokorny v. Judd, today’s date, unpub,
>     at around page 19.
>
>     Robert D. Wilson-Hoss
>
>     Hoss & Wilson-Hoss, LLP
>
>     236 West Birch Street
>
>     Shelton, WA 98584
>
>     360 426-2999
>
>     www.hossandwilson-hoss.com
>     <https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.hossandwilson-hoss.com%2F&data=04%7C01%7Cdberner%40phillipsburgesslaw.com%7Ccf767284684b4ba6182208d89bd0fc2a%7Cc077a7b2deb6407e83db7b3b5823302e%7C1%7C0%7C637430669186777684%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000&sdata=WEIq3eM79Pw%2Bm1Bhsl7WEfxKhx77z%2BpqPmrM5BOqFV8%3D&reserved=0>
>
>     rob at hctc.com <mailto:rob at hctc.com>
>
>     *From:* rob at hctc.com <mailto:rob at hctc.com> <rob at hctc.com>
>     <mailto:rob at hctc.com>
>     *Sent:* Monday, December 7, 2020 11:20 AM
>     *To:* 'WSBA Real Property Listserv' <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>
>     <mailto:wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>
>     *Subject:* RE: [WSBARP] Quiet Title Action and Boundary Line
>     Agreements Pursuant to RCW 58.04.007
>
>      1. There is an old AG opinion, AGO 2005 no. 2, March 7, 2005,
>          that says that cities and counties can review these
>         agreements. It is wrong, in my opinion. Regardless, many
>         municipalities do make some sort of agreement requirements,
>         but they are very inconsistent.
>      2. Any agreement will leave you with the need to still require
>         with density and other planning requirements such as set backs
>         when approval is sought for a project in the future on both
>         lots.  Lawyers should screen for these issues.
>      3. An interesting question is, if we start with a nonconforming
>         use (small lot size in development pre-existing minimum lot
>         size regulations, for example), and then we shrink that lot
>         size by another amount based on a boundary line agreement, are
>         we now in a place where we are violating minimum lot sizes,
>         and future project approvals will be impacted?
>
>      4. If your agency with authority insists, and you don’t want to
>         deal with them (some of them charge outrageous amounts for the
>         process of approving these), then perhaps a friendly lawsuit,
>         and name the city or county as a defendant. Probably cheaper
>         and more in your control than the permitting process in some
>         places. And you may not even need a survey if you can
>         accurately describe where the new line is.
>      5. If they appear and want to argue, then they have to show that
>         they have some sort of interest in the matter. I don’t think
>         they can do that.
>
>     Rob
>
>     Robert D. Wilson-Hoss
>
>     Hoss & Wilson-Hoss, LLP
>
>     236 West Birch Street
>
>     Shelton, WA 98584
>
>     360 426-2999
>
>     www.hossandwilson-hoss.com
>     <https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.hossandwilson-hoss.com%2F&data=04%7C01%7Cdberner%40phillipsburgesslaw.com%7Ccf767284684b4ba6182208d89bd0fc2a%7Cc077a7b2deb6407e83db7b3b5823302e%7C1%7C0%7C637430669186777684%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000&sdata=WEIq3eM79Pw%2Bm1Bhsl7WEfxKhx77z%2BpqPmrM5BOqFV8%3D&reserved=0>
>
>     rob at hctc.com <mailto:rob at hctc.com>
>
>     *From:* wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com
>     <mailto:wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com>
>     <wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com
>     <mailto:wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com>> *On Behalf Of *Rob
>     Bartlett
>     *Sent:* Monday, December 7, 2020 9:56 AM
>     *To:* WSBA Real Property Listserv <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com
>     <mailto:wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>>
>     *Subject:* Re: [WSBARP] Quiet Title Action and Boundary Line
>     Agreements Pursuant to RCW 58.04.007
>
>     We have run into this as well.  On at least on occasion notifying
>     the City it would need to be made a party to the quiet title
>     litigation made it back off.  But, it was clear it was going to
>     take this heavy-handed action in the future.  Have you threated to
>     make the city a party to the quiet title action?  And if so, what
>     was its response?
>
>     We’d all like to know.
>
>     --Rob
>
>     *Everyone at Cook & Bartlett is available to assist you during the
>     COVID-19 outbreak.  We are keeping our operations as normal as
>     possible, while practicing social distancing.  We are monitoring
>     our emails and phone calls, but might be delayed in responding.
>     Please let us know how we can assist you, and we will get back to
>     you as soon as possible. *
>
>     *Robert M. Bartlett, Esq.*
>     *Cook & Bartlett, PLLC*
>     1900 W. Nickerson St., Ste. 215
>     Seattle, WA 98119
>     (206) 282-2710
>     Fax: (206) 282-2707
>
>     /The information contained in this e-mail and in any attached
>     document(s) is CONFIDENTIAL and may be protected by
>     attorney-client privilege and/or the work-product doctrine.   The
>     e-mail (and attached document(s)) is intended only for use by the
>     person(s) to whom this e-mail is addressed.  If you are not the
>     intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any
>     dissemination, distribution, copying, or other use of such e-mail
>     and/or document(s) is strictly prohibited.  If you have received
>     this e-mail and/or any attached document(s) in error, please
>     immediately notify us by telephone at (206) 282-2710./
>
>     *From:* wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com
>     <mailto:wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com>
>     <wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com
>     <mailto:wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com>> *On Behalf Of
>     *Terrance Wilson
>     *Sent:* Monday, December 7, 2020 9:19 AM
>     *To:* 'WSBA Real Property Listserv' <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com
>     <mailto:wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>>
>     *Subject:* [WSBARP] Quiet Title Action and Boundary Line
>     Agreements Pursuant to RCW 58.04.007
>
>     Good Morning Colleagues,
>
>     I have been working with Adverse Possession Quiet Title cases and
>     Boundary Line Agreements pursuant to RCW 58.04.007 since the mid
>     1990's, originally in the capacity as the owner of a Land
>     Surveying busines, and since 2005 as a Real Estate attorney.  I
>     have worked on cases with some of you on this listserv.  Over the
>     years, different jurisdictions have pushed back on the use of
>     Boundary Line Agreements, and also threatened whether they would
>     recognize the reconfigured lot lines from either process if the
>     properties did not also go through the Lot Boundary Adjustment
>     process with the jurisdiction.
>
>     Currently, I am working with City of Seattle Legal (Patrick Downs)
>     and SDCI Planning Staff to delineate their policy on this matter.
>     They are threatening to require all properties that have been
>     reconfigured via Quiet Title Actions and Boundary Line Agreements
>     to additionally be subjected to the City's Lot Boundary Adjustment
>     process in order to be recognized.
>
>     This proposed policy is absurd.  Apart from the fact that future
>     owners who have relied upon the Quiet Title Action Judgments
>     and/or Boundary Line Agreements will not be willing to work
>     together on a Lot Boundary Adjustment process, I believe the
>     City's proposal to require such action exceeds their authority.
>
>     Mr. Downs has asked me for any appellate decisions that would
>     preclude the City from requiring a Lot Boundary Adjustment under
>     these circumstances.  I am not sure if there are any cases on
>     point, but the idea that the City could deny recognition of lot
>     boundaries that have been properly reconfigured via the Quiet
>     Title of Boundary Line Agreement process seems an overreach and
>     impractical as well.
>
>     Does anyone have experience with the City of Seattle in this
>     area?  Also, any ideas for a response to Mr. Downs regarding the
>     City's proposed denial of lots that have been adjusted by these
>     methods would be appreciated. I feel the consequences of the
>     City's policy in this matter will have far reaching ramifications
>     for many of us who practice in this area.
>
>     Best regards,
>
>     Terrance Randall Wilson, Managing Partner
>
>     Attorney at Law
>
>     *Wilson Law Group of WA*
>
>     (206) 550-3189 - Cell
>
>     (206) 805-6238 - Office
>
>
>
>     ***Disclaimer: Please note that RPPT listserv participation is not restricted to practicing attorneys and may include non-practicing attorneys, law students, professionals working in related fields, and others.***
>
>     _______________________________________________
>
>     WSBARP mailing list
>
>     WSBARP at lists.wsbarppt.com  <mailto:WSBARP at lists.wsbarppt.com>
>
>     http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/wsbarp  <https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fmailman.fsr.com%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fwsbarp&data=04%7C01%7Cdberner%40phillipsburgesslaw.com%7Ccf767284684b4ba6182208d89bd0fc2a%7Cc077a7b2deb6407e83db7b3b5823302e%7C1%7C0%7C637430669186787681%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C2000&sdata=XlXmZ3t2QyYWhXwOoqWtuA0JQnLmuZaWFdYza9NCTlg%3D&reserved=0>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20201208/f853cf4b/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 8374 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20201208/f853cf4b/image002.jpg>


More information about the WSBARP mailing list