<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<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 Definitions */
@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;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
span.EmailStyle19
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
span.apple-converted-space
{mso-style-name:apple-converted-space;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
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]-->
</head>
<body lang="EN-US" link="#0563C1" vlink="#954F72" style="word-wrap:break-word">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Is the purpose of this scenario to argue that one party should be entitled to a higher disbursement of the funds? If so, it could arguably be ousting. See below:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;color:black;background:white">Ouster occurs when a cotenant obtains sole possession of the land that is adverse to the other cotenants, where the cotenant repudiates or disavows the relation of the cotenancy
or where the tenant without possession is aware of actions by the tenant in possession that signify his or her intention to hold, occupy, and enjoy the premises exclusively. </span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;color:black">
<i><u><span style="border:none windowtext 1.0pt;padding:0in">Yakavonis v. Tilton</span></u></i>, 93 Wn. App. 304, 308, 968 P.2d 908, 910 (1998).
<span style="background:white">“In order for ouster to exist, there must be an assertion of a right to exclusive possession.”<span class="apple-converted-space"> </span><em><span style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;border:none windowtext 1.0pt;padding:0in">Cummings
v. Anderson,</span></em><span class="apple-converted-space"> </span>94 Wash.2d 135, 145, 614 P.2d 1283 (1980).
<u>In addition, “where the property is not adaptable to double occupancy, the mere occupation of the property by one cotenant may operate to exclude the other.”</u></span>
<i><u><span style="border:none windowtext 1.0pt;padding:0in">Yakavonis</span></u></i>, 93 Wn. App. At 308, 968 P.2d 908.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;color:black">Under your facts, Ouster could be found because of the NCO. The
<i>Yakavonis</i> court found Ouster where the trial court determined the ousted party had no interest in the parcel. The trial court’s ruling was deemed erroneous. Although, the ruling was determined to be erroneous and thus ouster, I believe even under a legal
NCO it is still ousting because the ruling is “adverse” to the ousted party. <o:p>
</o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;color:black">Disclaimer: Quick analysis and response. There may be other rules in play that are not assessed here.
</span><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Hope this helps. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;color:black">Shanece M. Dedeaux</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;color:black"> |
<a href="mailto:dedeauxs@dedeauxlaw.com">dedeauxs@dedeauxlaw.com</a> | 206.333.0448<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#222222"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#222222"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif;color:#222222">CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This email (including attachments) is covered by the Electronic Communications Act, 18 U.S.C. 2210-2521, is confidential, and may be legally
privileged. This email contains information that is private, confidential, or is protected by the attorney-client work product doctrines, and is intended only for the use of the individual(s) named herein. If you are not the intended recipient, be advised
that unauthorized use, disclosure, copying, distribution, or the taking of any action in reliance on this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify the sender by replying to this email and delete
the original message and any attachments. Thank you.</span><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;color:black">From:
</span></b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;color:black">wsbarp-bounces@lists.wsbarppt.com <wsbarp-bounces@lists.wsbarppt.com> on behalf of Jonathan Smith <jonathan@advantagelegalgroup.com><br>
<b>Date: </b>Wednesday, February 15, 2023 at 3:09 PM<br>
<b>To: </b>'WSBA Real Property Listserv' <wsbarp@lists.wsbarppt.com><br>
<b>Subject: </b>[WSBARP] Ouster<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Party A and B own a single family residence as tenants in common. Property has been sold and now funds are to be disbursed. If party A is charged with Assault 4 DV, but party A continues to occupy a single
family residence and party B is the is the protected party who as a result does not occupy the property, has party B been ousted? The NCO remains in effect for the duration of a 18 month SOC, has party B been legally ousted from the property? If so, how so
and if not why not? Thank you. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:#1F497D">Jonathan Smith
</span><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:#1F497D">Attorney at Law</span><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:#1F497D">(425)452-9797 Tel</span><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:#1F497D">(425)440-7681 Fax</span><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:#1F497D"> </span><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a href="http://advantagelegalgroup.com/"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:windowtext;text-decoration:none"><span style="color:#1F497D"><img border="0" width="165" height="36" style="width:1.7187in;height:.375in" id="Picture_x0020_1" src="cid:image001.jpg@01D9414F.1E0D4BF0" alt="Logo for email"></span></span></a><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:#002060">12207 NE 8th Street</span><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:#002060">Bellevue, WA 98005</span><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:#1F497D"> </span><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;color:#1F497D">This E-mail is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 USC Sections 2510-2521 and is legally privileged. This information is confidential and is intended only for the use of
the individual or entity named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited.</span><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:9.0pt;color:#2F5496">Legal Advice Disclaimer: You should recognize that responses provided by this email 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 could reach a different result. This communication does not create an attorney-client relationship.
</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;color:black"> </span><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><img border="0" width="84" height="120" style="width:.875in;height:1.25in" id="Picture_x0020_2" src="cid:image002.gif@01D9414F.1E0D4BF0"><img border="0" width="102" height="123" style="width:1.0625in;height:1.2812in" id="Picture_x0020_3" src="cid:image003.png@01D9414F.1E0D4BF0"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</body>
</html>