<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=windows-1252">
</head>
<body>
<p>What we do know is that it is correct that the Chapter 7 doesn't
discharge the lien, just the personal liability on the note. But
the note is where the payments derive from. The deed of trust
typically merely refers to the timing of payments by reference to
the note. I think neither my first email nor Edmundson's SOL
analysis may be based on bankruptcy law as much as state law.
Simply put, it is a bit illusory if not absurd to have a SOL
analysis that refers to the due date of payments that are no
longer due! I realize however that this would be problematic on
DOTs with notes that did not have acceleration clauses, if there
are any such things.<br>
</p>
Turning to Edmundson, that decision may have a fundamental flaw
prior to the SOL discussion in that the bankruptcy in that case was
a Chapter 13, not a Chapter 7. This is important because: (1) The
prior Bankruptcy Code did allow a Chapter 13 debtor's plan to avoid
a DOT lien if the lien was entirely unsecured by any equity, as was
often the case on second loans; and (2) If a creditor had not
objected to a confirmed plan which did improperly provide for
avoidance of the lien, then the lien would still be avoided even if
that avoidance wasn't allowed by the facts if contested. The first
may have changed with the Bankruptcy Act and the second may have
changed through either the Act or case law. I haven't practiced
bankruptcy over over 15 years now, and haven't kept up on such
things. But it very well may be that a better understanding of
bankruptcy law and the facts of that underlying case could have kept
the court from needing to address the SOL issue.<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">
Kary L. Krismer
206 723-2148</pre>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 2/3/2021 8:31 AM, Samuel M. Meyler
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:!&!AAAAAAAAAAAuAAAAAAAAACbHoCsc1ItKmJ4fEYgZbykBAMO2jhD3dRHOtM0AqgC7tuYAAAAAAA4AABAAAADaJy91M%2FI7QYre70MvaXATAQAAAAA=@meylerlegal.com">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=windows-1252">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered
medium)">
<!--[if !mso]><style>v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</style><![endif]-->
<style>@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}@font-face
{font-family:Consolas;
panose-1:2 11 6 9 2 2 4 3 2 4;}p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:#0563C1;
text-decoration:underline;}pre
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted Char";
margin:0in;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New";}span.HTMLPreformattedChar
{mso-style-name:"HTML Preformatted Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted";
font-family:Consolas;}span.EmailStyle24
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}</style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal">Correction… 8+ years, not 18+ years, since
discharge and missed payments. Slip of the finger! <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Thanks, Joseph. I was previously aware
that the statute of limitations accrues for each installment
at the time that the installment is due on the note but I am
no bankruptcy guru and had to research the interplay with
bankruptcy law. From what I gather, the bankruptcy code does
not discharge/eliminate the lien/security but under Washington
law, the statute of limitations to foreclose on the
lien/security accrued at the time of the first missed payment
because no installment could become due after that point as a
result of the discharge. <i><u>Edmundson v. Bank of Am</u>.,</i>
194 Wn. App. 920, 378 P.3d 272 (2016). The lender could have
foreclosed on their 2nd position DOT within 6 years but it has
been more than 8 years. The lender likely chose to forego
spending money and time foreclosing because of the fact that
they were in 2nd position. <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><i>Edmundson</i> provides that…<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black;background:white">Loan
servicer's action to foreclose on deed of trust that secured
promissory note accrued, and six-year limitations period
governing action to foreclose began to run, each month in
which borrowers' defaulted on installment note and deed of
trust by failing to make monthly payment, <b>until
borrowers' personal liability on note was discharged in
chapter 13</b>.</span><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black">
<i><u>Edmundson v. Bank of Am.</u></i>, 194 Wn. App. 920,
378 P.3d 272 (2016) (“<span style="background:white">Correspondingly,
the statute of limitations for each subsequent monthly
payment accrued on the first day of each month after
November 1, 2008 <b>until the Edmundsons no longer had
personal liability under the note. They no longer had
such liability as of the date of their bankruptcy
discharge, December 31, 2013. </b>Thus, from December
1, 2008 through December 1, 2013, the statute of
limitations accrued for each monthly payment under the
terms of the note as each payment became due.”)<o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black;background:white"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black">The
ruling in <i>Edmundson</i> has been followed and upheld by
both state and federal courts since that time… “<span
style="background:white">The Washington State Court of
Appeals expressly stated in <i>Edmundson</i> that the
statute of limitations on enforcement of a deed of trust
payable in installments accrues when the last installment
payment is due prior to discharge of a borrower's personal
liability on the corresponding promissory
note. 378 P.3d at 277.” </span><i><u>Hernandez v.
Franklin Credit Mgmt. Corp.</u></i>, BR 18-01159-TWD,
2019 WL 3804138, at *3 (W.D. Wash. Aug. 13, 2019), <i><u>aff'd
sub nom.</u></i> <i><u>In re Hernandez</u></i>, 820 Fed.
Appx. 593 (9th Cir. 2020)<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><i><u><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p><span
style="text-decoration:none"> </span></o:p></span></u></i></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:black">“<span
style="background:white">Every federal court that has
addressed this specific statute of limitations issue has
also adopted the holding in <i>Edmundson</i>. </span><i>See,
e.g.</i><span style="background:white">, </span><i>Jarvis</i><span
style="background:white">, Case No. C16-5194-RBL, Dkt. No.
47 at 6. Further, the Court does not see any reason to
conclude that the Washington State Supreme Court would
reach a contrary decision. Thus, the Bankruptcy Court, as
a federal court applying Washington law, was required to
apply the rule announced in <i>Edmundson</i>. </span><i>See</i><span
style="background:white"> </span><i>Gravquick A/S</i><span
style="background:white">, 323 F.3d at 1222. Regardless of
the potential policy implications it identified, the
Bankruptcy Court erred by treating the relevant portion of
the <i>Edmundson</i> decision as </span><i>dicta.” Id.</i><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:blue"><o:p> </o:p></span></b></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:blue">Samuel
M. Meyler</span></b><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:blue">Meyler
Legal, PLLC </span></b><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:blue">1700
Westlake Ave. N., Ste. 200<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:blue">Seattle,
Washington 98109</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:blue">Tel:</span></b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:blue">
206.876.7770<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:blue">Fax:</span></b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:blue">
206.876.7771<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:blue">Email:</span></b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:blue"> </span><a
href="mailto:samuel@meylerlegal.com"
moz-do-not-send="true"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:blue">samuel@meylerlegal.com</span></a><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:blue"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:blue">NOTICE:</span></b><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:8.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:blue"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:8.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:blue">This
electronic message contains information which may be
Confidential or Privileged and constitutes an electronic
communication within the meaning of the Electronic
Communications Privacy Act 18 USC 2510. The information is
intended to be for the use of the individual or entity
named above. If you are not the intended recipient,
please be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution
or use of the contents of this information is prohibited.
If you received this transmission in error, please notify
the sender and delete the copy you received together with
any attachments. Thank you.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1
1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>From:</b>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:wsbarp-bounces@lists.wsbarppt.com">wsbarp-bounces@lists.wsbarppt.com</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:wsbarp-bounces@lists.wsbarppt.com"><wsbarp-bounces@lists.wsbarppt.com></a> <b>On Behalf Of
</b>Joseph McIntosh<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, February 3, 2021 8:03 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> WSBA Real Property Listserv
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:wsbarp@lists.wsbarppt.com"><wsbarp@lists.wsbarppt.com></a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [WSBARP] Release of Deed of
Trust/Quiet Title?<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D">I don’t think
SOL matters. If you’re a lender, and you want ample time
for full performance, you negotiate a lengthy maturity. On
loans that have gone unpaid and not seen action for years,
the fine print will probably disclose a lengthy maturity. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1
1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>From:</b> <a
href="mailto:wsbarp-bounces@lists.wsbarppt.com"
moz-do-not-send="true">wsbarp-bounces@lists.wsbarppt.com</a>
[<a href="mailto:wsbarp-bounces@lists.wsbarppt.com"
moz-do-not-send="true">mailto:wsbarp-bounces@lists.wsbarppt.com</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Roger Hawkes<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, February 03, 2021 7:57 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> WSBA Real Property Listserv <<a
href="mailto:wsbarp@lists.wsbarppt.com"
moz-do-not-send="true">wsbarp@lists.wsbarppt.com</a>><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [WSBARP] Release of Deed of
Trust/Quiet Title?<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">I haven’t thought of this for a while; but,
why don’t lenders modify their contracts to refer to a state
that has really long sols?<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1
1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>From:</b> <a
href="mailto:wsbarp-bounces@lists.wsbarppt.com"
moz-do-not-send="true">wsbarp-bounces@lists.wsbarppt.com</a>
<<a href="mailto:wsbarp-bounces@lists.wsbarppt.com"
moz-do-not-send="true">wsbarp-bounces@lists.wsbarppt.com</a>>
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Joseph McIntosh<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, February 3, 2021 7:43 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> WSBA Real Property Listserv <<a
href="mailto:wsbarp@lists.wsbarppt.com"
moz-do-not-send="true">wsbarp@lists.wsbarppt.com</a>><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [WSBARP] Release of Deed of
Trust/Quiet Title?<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D">A bankruptcy
discharge does not eliminate a secured debt, or its
repayment schedule, it just eliminates a remedy – personal
recourse. There’s a couple discharge provisions in the code
address this.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D">If there have
been 18 years of missed payments, some would be currently
time barred by the state’s 6 yr statute for enforcement of
written contracts, but some not. The lien still is still
intact as to some missed payments that have not yet expired
under the statute, and others if they have not yet come due.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1
1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>From:</b> <a
href="mailto:wsbarp-bounces@lists.wsbarppt.com"
moz-do-not-send="true">wsbarp-bounces@lists.wsbarppt.com</a>
[<a href="mailto:wsbarp-bounces@lists.wsbarppt.com"
moz-do-not-send="true">mailto:wsbarp-bounces@lists.wsbarppt.com</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Kary Krismer<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, February 03, 2021 7:14 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> <a href="mailto:wsbarp@lists.wsbarppt.com"
moz-do-not-send="true">wsbarp@lists.wsbarppt.com</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [WSBARP] Release of Deed of
Trust/Quiet Title?<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p>I'm not familiar with those appellate court cases, but if the
statute of limitations argument is based on due date of
periodic payments I have a hard time seeing how due date for a
periodic payment could be after it was discharged. So
seemingly the bankruptcy discharge date would be the latest
date for the statute of limitations for all the payments. But
if so, doesn't that line of cases presumably work in favor of
the OP's client since all the payments would have been due
over 18 years ago?<o:p></o:p></p>
<p>Also, to the extent that the Bankruptcy Act does have
applicable language, it would presumably say that the
creditor's claim was the full amount, not just those payments
prior to bankruptcy. I don't see, however, how such
provisions would affect a states law SOL.<o:p></o:p></p>
<pre>Kary L. Krismer<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre>206 723-2148<o:p></o:p></pre>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On 2/3/2021 5:58 AM, Joseph McIntosh
wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D">A quiet title
can be maintained if the statute of limitations for
enforcement of the lien is expired. Commencement of the
statue typically depends on when rights contractually
accrue, so you would have to look at the contract, and
particularly, it’s maturity. If it’s an installment
thirty year mortgage, there might be some payments that
have not yet come due (and rights to enforce that have not
accrued), unless there was an event of acceleration. </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D">There is some
goofy language from a recent WA appellate court that says
a bankruptcy discharge matures a secured loan, although
that language has been pretty widely panned, and there’s a
couple cases in the pipeline seeking correction of that
language. Nothing from the bankruptcy code says a
personal discharge matures or accelerates secured debt. </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1
1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>From:</b> <a
href="mailto:wsbarp-bounces@lists.wsbarppt.com"
moz-do-not-send="true">wsbarp-bounces@lists.wsbarppt.com</a>
[<a href="mailto:wsbarp-bounces@lists.wsbarppt.com"
moz-do-not-send="true">mailto:wsbarp-bounces@lists.wsbarppt.com</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Samuel M. Meyler<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, February 2, 2021 7:41 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> 'WSBA Real Property Listserv' <a
href="mailto:wsbarp@lists.wsbarppt.com"
moz-do-not-send="true"><wsbarp@lists.wsbarppt.com></a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> [WSBARP] Release of Deed of Trust/Quiet
Title?<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Listmates,<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Property owner has a 1<sup>st</sup> and 2<sup>nd</sup>
position mortgage/deeds of trust encumbering the property.
Owner files for bankruptcy in 2012. Standard Order of
Discharge enters. Owner works out a loan modification with
the 1<sup>st</sup> position lender but does not with the 2<sup>nd</sup>.
2<sup>nd</sup> DOT continues to appear on title now that the
property is being sold. It has now been over 18 years since
the discharge. What are the options here? Has anyone ever
had success in getting a lender in this position to
release/reconvey? Should the 2<sup>nd</sup> DOT be removed
via quiet title action? Thanks for your input.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:blue"> </span></b><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:blue">Samuel
M. Meyler</span></b><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:blue">Meyler
Legal, PLLC </span></b><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:blue">1700
Westlake Ave. N., Ste. 200</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:blue">Seattle,
Washington 98109</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:blue">Tel:</span></b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:blue">
206.876.7770</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:blue">Fax:</span></b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:blue">
206.876.7771</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:blue">Email:</span></b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:blue"> </span><a
href="mailto:samuel@meylerlegal.com"
moz-do-not-send="true"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:blue">samuel@meylerlegal.com</span></a><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:blue"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:blue">NOTICE:</span></b><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:8.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:blue"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:8.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:blue">This
electronic message contains information which may be
Confidential or Privileged and constitutes an electronic
communication within the meaning of the Electronic
Communications Privacy Act 18 USC 2510. The information is
intended to be for the use of the individual or entity
named above. If you are not the intended recipient,
please be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution
or use of the contents of this information is prohibited.
If you received this transmission in error, please notify
the sender and delete the copy you received together with
any attachments. Thank you.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<pre>***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.***<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre><o:p> </o:p></pre>
<pre>_______________________________________________<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre>WSBARP mailing list<o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre><a href="mailto:WSBARP@lists.wsbarppt.com" moz-do-not-send="true">WSBARP@lists.wsbarppt.com</a><o:p></o:p></pre>
<pre><a href="http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/wsbarp" moz-do-not-send="true">http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/wsbarp</a><o:p></o:p></pre>
</blockquote>
<div id="DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:center"
align="center"><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif">
<hr style="color:#909090" width="99%" size="1"
noshade="noshade" align="center"></span></div>
<table class="MsoNormalTable" style="border-collapse:collapse"
cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" border="0">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="padding:0in 11.25pt 0in 6.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"><a
href="https://www.avast.com/antivirus"
moz-do-not-send="true"><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times
New Roman",serif;border:solid windowtext
1.0pt;padding:0in;text-decoration:none"><img
style="width:1.04in;height:1.04in"
id="Picture_x0020_2"
src="cid:part17.6242E3EB.6D72AD6D@comcast.net"
alt="Image removed by sender. Avast logo"
class="" width="100" height="100" border="0"></span></a><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times
New Roman",serif"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</td>
<td style="padding:.75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt">
<p><span
style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#3D4D5A">This
email has been checked for viruses by Avast
antivirus software. <br>
<a href="https://www.avast.com/antivirus"
moz-do-not-send="true">www.avast.com</a> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New
Roman",serif"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">***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
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:WSBARP@lists.wsbarppt.com">WSBARP@lists.wsbarppt.com</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/wsbarp">http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/wsbarp</a></pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>