IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON

SNOWDON ASSOCIATES LLC, Respondent,

v. STEPHANIE DRUXMAN, Appellant. NO. 71338-8-1 DIVISION ONE

UNPUBLISHED OPINION FILED: January 20, 2015 v'^ "i- -;.")

--—• '-"-* -* '"'"• —A £-* «- 'A ^ t ^, ro -:'•^f" a> ',:.-,,;••"• *,:^r\\r ~z* ~S-~'

•"-' "".'•'" t.n CO ^\C3 O"" sr & "-*—



### Lau, J. —Stephanie Druxman appeals from an order granting Snowdon Associates LLC a writ of restitution restoring possession of the premises based on her 

### failure to pay rent into the court registry orfile a sworn statement as required under RCW 59.18.375 of the Residential Landlord-Tenant Act. She contends the trial court 

### lacked personaljurisdiction to enter the writ ofrestitution and Snowdon'sdelivery of the 

### required statutory notice was defective. Because the courtproperly issued thewritof restitution and Snowdon compliedwith the statutorydelivery requirements, we affirm the court's order granting the writ of restitution. FACTS 

### The parties agree the facts are not disputed. Stephanie Druxman signed a 

### rental agreementwith Snowdon Associates LLC for apartment 204located in King 

### County, Washington. Druxman fell behind on her rentpayment. On September2013, Snowdon served her with a written three-day notice to pay rent or vacate the unit.71338-8-1/2
RCW 59.12.030(3). She did not pay rent or vacate the premises. After five unsuccessful attempts to serve Druxman with an eviction summons and complaint by personal service, Snowdon obtained a superior court order authorizing alternative service of process by posting and mailing under RCW 59.18.055. This order authorized Snowdon to post and mail the eviction summons, the complaint, and written notice of RCW 59.18.375's payment or sworn statement requirement and an order to show cause. Snowdon posted these documents on the door of unit 204 and mailed two copies to Druxman using prepaid and certified mail pursuant to the court order. Both the notice and the summons indicated that Druxman should respond by October 3, 2013. The notice stated in part that by October 3, 2013, Druxman must (1) pay rent into the court registry or (2) file a sworn statementthat she did not owe the rent claimed due. 

### Itwarned, "Ifyou fail to do one ofthe above on or before the deadline date, the sheriff could evict you without a hearing even if you have also received a notice that a hearing has been scheduled." Druxman did neither. On September 25, 2013, Druxman filed a pro se notice ofappearance in 

### response to the summons, included with her notice ofappearance was an October2, 2013 unsworn letter addressed to Snowdon stating that she was responding to the 

### notice posted on her door and that she stilloccupied the unit. She expressed her desire to settle the matter without further court proceedings. She did not contest that she owed rent. 

### Iam writing in response to a Notice ofAbandonment posted on my 

### apartment, yesterday, October 1st, 2013. Iam still currently residing in unit 204 and have not therefore abandoned the unit. Iam surprised to have received this -2-71338-8-1/3
Notice because Ihave not indicated to the manager that Ihave left and 

### furthermore Iresponded to the eviction action brought against me byfiling and properly serving a Notice ofAppearance last week on September 25, 2013. Inaddition, Iam writing to notifythe managementthat because Iam still 

### occupying the unit, the Residential Landlord-TenantAct entitles me to 48-hour written notice of a specific time in which the landlord would like to show the unit. Iwill not refuse such entry by the landlord after getting such notice as long as it doesn't cause me unreasonable inconvenience for some reason at that specific time. 

### Finally, Iwould like to discuss a resolution to this situation and a potential settlement out of court for an extended move-out and payment plan. Icame into 

### financial difficulty and Iam workingwith various agencies to assist me with rent payments. Please contact me to discuss a potential settlement. On October 7, Snowdon moved for a writ ofrestitution for Druxman's failure to 

### pay rentinto the court registry orfile a sworn statement as required under RCW 59.18.375. The motion stated: 

### The Eviction Summons &the Payment or Sworn Statement Requirement 

### form require the defendants to respond in writing and to either pay $975 into the 

### registry of the court or to deliver and file a swornstatement settingforth why the rent is not owed. 

### Defendants have not paid any funds into the registry ofthe court. Defendants have submitted a written response which is neither a sworn 

### statement or a denial by the defendants that rent is not owed. Copies of the defendants' response is attached hereto. Pursuantto RCW 59.18.375(4)the 

### plaintiffisentitled to "immediate issuance of awrit ofrestitution withoutfurther notice to the defendant." 

### The court granted the motion and entered an order forwrit ofrestitution the same day. 

### On October 10, the court denied Druxman's motion to vacate the order of default 

### and quash thewrit ofrestitution. On December4, the courtdenied hermotion for revision. Druxman appeals.71338-8-1/4

ANALYSIS The unlawful detainer act and the Residential Landlord Tenant Act create a 

### special, summary proceeding for the recovery ofpossession of real property. Hous. Auth. of Seattle v.Silva, 94 Wn. App. 731, 734, 972 P.2d 952 (1999). In order to take 

### advantage of itsfavorable provisions, a landlord must comply with the requirements of the statute. Hous. Auth. ofCity of Everett v. Terry, 114 Wn.2d 558, 563-64, 789 P.2d 

### 745 (1990). Unlawful detainer statutes are inderogation of the common law and are 

### strictly construed in favor of the tenant. Naaesh v. Sawver, 131 Wn. App. 822, 826, 129 P.3d 824 (2006). 

### Questions ofstatutory interpretation are questions of lawthat we review de novo. Bostain v. Food Express, Inc., 159 Wn.2d 700, 708, 153 P.3d 846 (2007). Likewise, we 

### review de novo questions of law and the application of the law to established facts. Attorney Gen.'s Office v. Wash. Utils. &Transp. Comm'n. 128 Wn. App. 818, 827, 116 P.3d 1064 (2005). 

### Druxman challenges the superior court commissioner's order granting a writ of restitution in favor of Snowdon.1 She essentially contends two groundsjustifyreversal. 

### Druxman argues thatbecause the court lacked personaljurisdiction over her, itwas without authority to issue the writ ofrestitution premised on herfailure to comply with 

### the payment orsworn statement requirement ofRCW 59.18.375. She also argues in the alternative that Snowdon's delivery of the payment or sworn statement requirement 

### 1Druxman also challenges the court commissioner's order denying her motion to vacate the writ of restitution order and order denying her revision motion.
-4-71338-8-1/5


### notice under RCW 59.18.055 was defective because that statute "onlyauthorizes service ofthe summons and complaint."2
Personal Jurisdiction Druxman further argues: Because the court does not have personaljurisdiction over the defendant, the court does not havejurisdiction to require the defendant to pay money into the court registry as detailed in the [payment or sworn statement requirement notice]. Because the court does not have authority to order compliance with the [payment or sworn statement requirement notice], itwould be illogical for the court to default the defendant for the defendant's failure to comply with the [payment or sworn statement requirement notice]. Appellant's Br. at 8. 

### Snowdon obtained a court order under RCW 59.18.055(1 )3 allowing an alternative means of service on Druxman after numerous unsuccessful attempts at personal service. RCW 59.18.055 authorizes an alternative service method ifpersonal service of the summons and complaint cannot be obtained after the exercise of due 

### diligence. Underthis method, copies ofthe summons and complaint are posted on the premises and sent by regular and certified mail to the tenant. RCW 59.18.055(1 )(b). A 

### landlord's remedy is "generally limited to restoration of the premises when this special service statute is utilized." Neqash, 131 Wn. App. at 826. No moneyjudgment is 

### authorized untiljurisdiction is obtained overthe tenant. RCW 59.18.055(1)(b).

2Druxman does not challenge the constitutionality ofeither statute. 3RCW 59.18.055(1 )(b) provides in part: "When service on the defendant or defendants is accomplished by this alternative 

### procedure, the court's jurisdiction is limited to restoring possession of the premises to the plaintiffand no moneyjudgment may be entered against the defendant or defendants until such time asjurisdiction over the defendant ordefendants is obtained." -5-71338-8-1/6



### Using this court-authorized alternative method, Snowdon posted copies of the summons, complaint, and payment or sworn statement requirement notice on the 

### premises and sentthem by regular and certified mail to Druxman.4'5 RCW 59.18.375 provides a landlord with an optional method for restitution ofthe 

### premises. A landlord electing this restitution method must deliver a payment or sworn statement requirement notice to the tenant if itelects restitution under this statute. 

### RCW 59.18.375(7). RCW 59.18.375(7) specifies both the form ofthe notice and what information must be contained in the notice. Relevant here, the notice informed 

### Druxmanthat she must pay the alleged pastdue rent into the court registry and continue to pay the rent pending litigation or submit a sworn statement denying rent is 

### due based on a legal orequitable defense orset-off. RCW 59.18.375(2).6 Druxman concedes she did neither.7

4The order states: 

### "This matter came on for hearing this day on plaintiff's motion, and itappearing 

### that the defendant is actively avoiding service ofprocess; THEREFORE "IT IS HEREBY ORDERED thatthe Eviction Summons, Complaintfor Unlawful 

### Detainer, Payment or SwornStatement Requirement, and Order to ShowCause may be served on the defendants by posting copies thereofto the front door of the defendants' residence at 106 Bellevue Avenue East, Apt. 204, Seattle, King County, 

### Washington and bymailing copies ofthe same to the defendants at the address ofthe 

### premises byboth regular mail andby certified (return receipt requested)mail." 5Druxman concedes she received all three ofthese documents. 6 RCW 59.18.375(2) states: 

### "In an action offorcible entry, detainer, orunlawful detainer, commenced under this 

### chapterwhich is based upon nonpayment ofrent as provided in RCW 59.12.030(3), the defendant shall payinto the courtregistry the amount alleged due in the notice described in this section and continue to pay into the court registry the monthly rent as it becomes due underthe terms ofthe rental agreement whilethe action is pending. -6-71338-8-1/7
Atenant's failure to comply with this requirement "shall be grounds for immediate issuance of a writ of restitution without further notice to the defendant RCW 59.18.375(4). Inthis case, the court issued the writ of restitution on grounds that 

### Druxman failed to pay rent into the court registry or to submit a sworn statement.8 Nonetheless, Druxman appears to argue that the court lacked personal jurisdiction to issue the writ of restitution because itwas withoutjurisdiction to require or 

### order her to comply with the statutory requirement ofpayment or sworn statement.9'10 Appellant's Br. at 8-9.
Such payment is not required ifthe defendant submits to the court a written statement signed and sworn under penalty ofperjury that sets forth the reasons why the rent 

### alleged due inthe notice is not owed. Inthe written statement, the defendant may provide as a reason that the rent alleged due inthe notice is not owed based upon a 

### legal or equitable defense or set-offarising out ofthe tenancy." 7"Ms. Druxman did not deposit money into the court registry nor did she file a sworn statement that she did not owe rent." Appellant's Br. at 5. 8The court's orderfor writ of restitution states in part: "The Defendants have failed to either pay the past due rent into the registry ofthe court or to serve and file a sworn statement setting forth why the rent is not owed . . . ." The court, therefore ordered: "1. The Clerk ofthe Court is to issue a Writ of Restitution forthwith, returnable as 

### provided by law, and containing a 20-day automatic extension and break and enter provision, restoring plaintiffto possession ofthe premises located at 106 Bellevue Avenue East, Apt. 204, Seattle, King County, Washington. "2. There is no substantial issue of material fact ofthe right of plaintiff to be 

### granted the reliefas prayed for inthe complaint and provided by statute. "3. Defendants STEPHANIE DRUXMAN and JOHN DOE are guilty of unlawful detainer and defendants' tenancy at the described residential premises is hereby terminated." The writ directs restoration ofthe property to Snowdon, but does not include a moneyjudgment against Druxman. 

### 9To support this argument she relies on St. John Medical Centerv. State ex rel. Department of Social and Health Services, 110 Wn. App. 51, 59, 38 P.3d 383 

### (2002), for the unremarkable rule that a court generally must have subject matter -7-71338-8-1/8 

### Druxman points to nowherein RCW 59.18.375 mandating the court torequire or order her to complywith the payment or sworn statement requirement in order to issue


### awrit ofrestitution. Nordoes she cite anyrelevant authority to supportthisargument. 

### Further, therecord shows that thecourt never required orordered Druxman tocomply with the payment or sworn statement requirement.11 The record here shows the court 

### properly issued the writ ofrestitution restoringpossession of the premises. The court 

### actedwithin its limited statutory authority to issue thewrit ofrestitution restoring possession of the premises upon determining the narrowquestion of whether Druxman 

### complied with RCW 59.18.375(2)'s payment or swornstatement requirement. Ifa tenant does not comply, the statute directs that a writ of restitution must be issued. 

### RCW59.18.375(4). Indeed, Druxmanacknowledges that the landlord "and the court havejurisdiction with respect to the property allowing the court to issue a writ of 

### restitution that restores possession of the property to the plaintiff/landlord." Appellant's Br. at 8. In sum, this case involves no issue of personaljurisdiction and the court properly issued the writ of restitution. Delivery ofthe Payment or Sworn Statement Requirement Notice 

### Druxman also argues in the alternative that delivery of the payment and sworn statement requirement notice was defective because Snowdon served ittogetherwith the summons and complaint contrary to RCW59.18.055. According to Druxman, that jurisdiction and personaljurisdiction over the parties to hear and decide a case. Appellant's Br. at 8.

10

### We note Druxman's arguments are brief and not entirely clear. 

### 11 We note that Druxman's briefs on appeal erroneously refer to the court's order granting writ of restitution as a "default" order. -8-71338-8-1/9

statute authorizes service of only the summons and complaint, but not the notice. She 

### also relies on CR 4 and 5 to argue that the notice must be personally served on her. We are not persuaded by these contentions. As discussed above, Snowdon obtained a superior court order authorizing service ofthe summons, complaint, and payment and sworn statement requirement notice by posting and mail. Druxman does not challenge that order. Her reliance on CR 4 governing original service of process and CR 5 governing delivery of all other documents is misplaced. RCW 59.18.375(8) controls delivery ofthe notice here. That statute authorizes delivery ofthe notice by mailing and posting it with the summons and complaint. Subsection 8 provides, "The notice
. . . may be served pursuant to applicable civilrules either with a filed eviction

summons and complaint or any time after an eviction summons and complaint have been filed with the court." (Emphasis added.) There is no dispute that notice was served with the eviction summons and complaint. We conclude that Snowdon properly delivered the notice ofthe payment or
sworn statement requirement to Druxman according to the civil rules, the court's unchallenged order, and RCW 59.18.375(8). CONCLUSION Because the court properly issued the writ of restitution and Snowdon properly 

### delivered the required payment and sworn statement requirement notice, we affirmthe trial court's order granting the writ of restitution.

WE CONCUR: *^