Opinion ID: 1354891
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: request for relief

Text: Petitioner Daves contends that Nastos should not have been permitted to raise the name change issue at trial. She asserts that CR 15(b) requires that issues not raised in the pleadings be tried only with the implicit or explicit consent of the opposing party. [1] Daves argues that she had no time to prepare to contest the issue and she was prejudiced by the court's action permitting the issue to be raised. The Court of Appeals concluded, however, that CR 54(c) applies in this case. CR 54(c) provides, in part, that every final nondefault judgment shall grant the relief to which the party in whose favor it is rendered is entitled, even if the party has not demanded such relief in his pleadings. The Court of Appeals said that CR 15(b) is addressed to the litigation of issues rather than to the granting of relief, thus suggesting CR 15(b) may not apply to this case. Further, the court seemed to say that even if CR 15(b) applies to the name change request, petitioner failed to show any prejudice resulting from the raising of the issue. See CR 15(b). Two points are implicated by petitioner's argument that CR 15(b) precludes Nastos from requesting the name change. First, petitioner did not argue prejudice to the Court of Appeals, although she does so now. Second, under CR 15(b) the trial court may grant a continuance to enable the objecting party to meet evidence which would otherwise prejudice that party. Nothing in the record indicates whether or not a continuance was sought. If a continuance is not requested, a CR 15(b) objection is not available on appeal. V.C. Edwards Contracting Co. v. Port of Tacoma, 83 Wn.2d 7, 514 P.2d 1381 (1973). Nonetheless, applicability of CR 54(c) is questionable. This rule provides that the court shall grant relief to which the party is entitled, even if not requested in the pleadings. The appropriateness of applying CR 54(c) in this case obviously depends on whether Nastos is entitled to the name change of his daughter. This question, in turn, depends on the authority of the court to grant the requested name change, and on the circumstances under which any such authority is properly exercised in a given case. These questions are separately discussed below.