Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Robin L. Miller Construction Co. v. Coltran

June 2, 1997

ROBIN L. MILLER CONSTRUCTION CO., INC., A WASHINGTON CORPORATION, APPELLANT, AND JIM PARIS, D/B/A PARIS PLUMBING, PLAINTIFF,
v.
DAVID COLTRAN, D/B/A SHEA'S STYLING SHOP, AND "JANE DOE" COLTRAN, HIS WIFE, AND THE MARITAL COMMUNITY COMPOSED THEREOF, DEFENDANTS, KEVIN HYPPA AND KARI HYPPA, RESPONDENTS.



Appeal from Superior Court of King County. Docket No: 88-2-19701-6. Date filed: 07/18/95. Judge signing: Hon. Robert S. Lasnik.

Authored by Ronald E. Cox. Concurring: Faye C. Kennedy, Mary K. Becker.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Cox

COX, J. -- Robin Miller Construction Co. (RMC) appeals an order appointing an appraiser and an order quashing a writ of execution based on a lack of net value above the total of the homestead exemption, liens, and encumbrances. Because the trial court properly determined that the valuation process is intended to determine the homestead claimant's net value in the property and there was no such value here, we affirm.

In 1989, RMC obtained a default judgment against the Coltrans. Three years later, RMC recorded its judgment.

In August 1992, HFC made a loan to the Coltrans. This loan was evidenced by a promissory note and secured by a deed of trust, which HFC recorded.

The Coltrans defaulted on their loan, and HFC foreclosed its deed of trust in January 1994. HFC acquired the Coltrans' residence at the trustee's sale.

In March of that year, HFC sold the property to the Hyppas. The Hyppas made a down payment, and HFC financed the balance of the price by a note that was secured by a deed of trust.

In March 1995, RMC sought to execute against the property now owned by the Hyppas on the basis of its judgment lien. RMC obtained a writ of execution, and the sheriff served a notice of sale on the Hyppas.

RMC petitioned to have an appraiser appointed pursuant to RCW 6.13.090 and 6.13.100. RMC took the position below that the appraiser should determine the net value of the property as defined by RCW 6.13.010(3) as of the date RMC recorded its judgment against the property in 1992. The Hyppas intervened and argued that the net value should be determined during their ownership of the property, not before. The appraiser estimated the market value of the property as of July 1995 was $145,000. He further determined that there was no net value over the sum of the homestead exemption ($30,000), liens ($18,904 judgment of RMC), and encumbrances ($111,650 HFC deed of trust) as of that date.

The Hyppas moved for an order quashing the writ of execution and sale because no net value existed. The trial court granted the Hyppas' motion. RMC appeals both this order and the trial court's previous order appointing an appraiser.

I

Net Value

RMC claims that the trial court erred because it should have determined that there was net value in the property as of July 1992, the date RMC recorded its judgment against the Coltrans. The application of the homestead statutes to these facts is a question of statutory interpretation that we review de novo. *fn1

RMC conceded at oral argument that the Hyppas have a valid homestead. It further conceded that there was nothing preventing it from executing against this property prior to ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.