Subscribe in a reader

ISSAQUAH LAW GROUP   PERSONAL INJURY LITIGATION LAWYERS

Issaquah Law Group - Injury Litigation Attorneys

TRUST: Personal injuries are personal. Which is why the attorneys at ILG treat every client and every case differently. Because they are different, and extremely personal. ILG was founded on the principle that strong client relationships are the key to successful legal representation and strong relationships are built on trust. Trust that you will be heard. Trust that you will be protected. Trust that every effort will be made to see justice done in your case. The singular goal of every ILG attorney is to earn and preserve that trust.

EXPERIENCE: ILG attorneys have a broad base of litigation experience to draw on in all Federal and State courts from on-the-ground investigations to Supreme Court appeals and we bring this experience to bear on behalf of our clients in personal injury and wrongful death claims arising out of motor vehicle accidents, bus versus pedestrian accidents, defective and dangerous products, medical malpractice, slip/trip and fall accidents, and catastrophic losses due to fire.

LOCATION: We are located on the Eastside in Issaquah, convenient to Bellevue, Redmond, Kirkland, Renton, Sammamish and North Bend. However, we provide legal services in King County, Pierce County, Snohomish County and throughout the entire state of Washington.

In addition, through The Amateur Law Professor Blog and LinkedIn postings, we share pertinent opinions and decisions of the Washington State Supreme Court, as well as the pertinent opinions and decisions of the Washington State Courts of Appeal so that our clients can be as update to date on cutting legal issues as we are.

WA Legal Roundup - Div I: Superior Court ALWAYS has SMJ for Unlawful Detainer, Housing Authority Hearing Officer ALWAYS has authority to reschedule

Housing Authority of Seattle v. Bin

So Bin had some issues with housing, something about not providing enough information. She went to a hearing that was rescheduled to a date where her attorney couldn't appear. She speaks limited English. The hearing officer, when asked to reschedule, went and talked to the scheduling coordinator outside the presence of counsel and Bin (there by her lonesome). She had asked for it to be continued to a date where her attorney could be there. The hearing officer said he didn't have the authority.

Four major issues with this one:

They didn't provide her with a translator or translate important documents. Since they were forcing her to proceed pro se, they needed to.

Second, the hearing examiner always has authority to reschedule. He's not bound by the scheduling officer telling him he shouldn't reschedule. Like He-Man, he has the power.

Third, error for the H.E. to go and talk with the scheduling officer to make his decision. No opportunity to respond=no due process.

Finally, there was some confusion about when jurisdiction vests with the Superior Court in an unlawful detainer with this kind of administrative remedy. The Court held that the Superior Court always has subject matter jurisdiction.

Subscribe in a reader

Copyright 2014-2018 by Issaquah Law Group, PLLC. Powered by Squarespace. Background image by jakeliefer.