Opinion ID: 2757580
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: The first appeal and subsequent litigation

Text: In November 2001 Jones, represented by Philip Talmadge, appealed Judge Baker's decision to the Court of Appeals, Division Three. Division Three reversed Judge Baker's decision. In re Estate of Jones, 116 Wn. App. 353, 67 P.3d 1113 (2003). Peter and Jeffrey appealed Division Three's decision to this court, and we reversed, reinstating the trial court's ruling that the record supported the trial court's finding that the house was worth $159,000; that Jones' second appraisal of the piano was questionable; that Jones breached his fiduciary duty; and that it was proper to remove Jones as PR. In re Estate ofJones, 152 Wn.2d 1, 21-22, 93 P.3d 147 (2004). On appeal, Jones did not assign error to the trial court's valuation of the piano and house; as such, the findings were verities on appeal. The court remanded for a final accounting. Id. at 22. After remand, Jones began to represent himself. Jones did not move for reconsideration of this court's decision. However, from 2004-2005 Jones filed a series of motions in superior court: three motions to disqualify Judge Baker, two motions for a neutral judge, four motions for reappraisal of the estate's assets, and one motion for witness testimony. In his second motion to disqualify Judge Baker, filed in February 2005, Jones asserted that Judge Baker made comments about him 7 In re Disciplinary Proceeding Against Jones, No. 201,256-6 at a reception in September 2001 ,7 during the 2001 trial. This motion was the first time that Jones raised the issue of actual bias based on Judge Baker's alleged comment three and a half years earlier. The hearing officer found that Jones' allegations regarding the statement made by Judge Baker were not credible. In his motions for reappraisal of the piano, Jones claimed that the piano's value had not been fully litigated before the court. 8 Judge Baker denied these motions, finding that they did not contain any factual or legal basis, and awarded attorney fees and costs to Peter and Jeffrey. In March 2005 Jones filed another series of motions. These motions sought relief from Judge Baker's 2001 judgment under CR 60(b)(4) and (11) 9 or CR 54(b). 10 7 Jones claimed that Judge Baker stated, 'Russell Jones, I can't listen to him' to another attendee at a reception at Gonzaga Law School. Opening Br. ofResp't Jones at 16. 8 Jones' arguments regarding the valuation of the piano and whether it was decided res judicata will be discussed further below. See infra Part IV.A.2. 9 CR 60(b) states: On motion and upon such terms as are just, the court may relieve a party or his legal representative from a final judgment, order, or proceeding for the following reasons: (4) Fraud (whether heretofore denominated intrinsic or extrinsic), misrepresentation, or other misconduct of an adverse party; (11) Any other reason justifying relief from the operation of the judgment. 1oCR 54(b) states: When more than one claim for relief is presented in an action, whether as a claim, counterclaim, cross claim, or third party claim, or when multiple parties are involved, the court may direct the entry of a final judgment as to one or more but fewer than all of the claims or parties only upon an express determination in the judgment, supported by written findings, that there is no just reason for delay and upon an express direction for the entry of judgment. The findings may be made at the time of entry of judgment or thereafter on the court's own motion or on motion of any party. In the absence of such findings, determination and direction, any order 8 In re Disciplinary Proceeding Against Jones, No. 201,256-6 Through these motions Jones attempted to present evidence that he did not present at the trial in 2001. Peter and Jeffrey moved for sanctions under CR 11, claiming that. the issues in Jones' motions were fully litigated and thus his motions were frivolous. All motions made by Jones were denied by Judge Baker and found frivolous by the hearing officer. Judge Baker awarded Peter and Jeffrey sanctions against Jones.