Court Opinion

ID: 9793189
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-31 02:44:11.828071+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:03:45.546958
License: Public Domain

Dore, J.
(dissenting) — The majority correctly sets forth the law in this state regarding the protection of out-of-state creditors.
However, the majority was mistaken in its application of that law to the facts in the subject case. The majority cites several Colorado statutes and concludes that defendant wife's separate property is not subject to execution for debts of her husband. This assertion is unquestioned in the instant case. Plaintiff in the subjéct case does not attempt to reach those separate assets.
The question which must be resolved here is whether plaintiff should be able to reach those assets which are *801classified as defendants' community property in this state, such as wages and jointly owned property. Our Supreme Court in Pacific States Cut Stone Co. v. Goble, 70 Wn.2d 907, 425 P.2d 631 (1967) was faced with the same dilemma and stated-at page 913:
Since there is no community property law in Oregon, no solution to the instant problem of the liability of community property can be found in Oregon statutes or decisions. As far as we can proceed in applying Oregon law is to say that, if the contract before us had been executed by Oregon husbands who thereafter remained in Oregon, the plaintiff-creditor would have been able to reach all property of the couple in satisfaction of the debt, except that separately owned by the wives.
(Italics mine.)
This same conclusion should be reached in this case. Those Colorado statutes protecting the wife's property from execution only apply to her separate property. Those statutes do not concern property owned jointly by the spouses. By holding that the wages of the husband and other jointly owned property of the defendants are subject to a debt of the defendant husband, we reach a just result because it "accords with the expectations of creditors, husbands, and wives, under either Washington or Oregon law." Pacific States Cut Stone Co. v. Goble, supra at 913.
I would reverse summary judgment for defendants.
Reconsideration denied January 22,1980.
Review granted by Supreme Court March 21, 1980.