Category: Washington State

Even when there isn’t a written agreement, a court may find that an easement exists. The big four – Prescriptive Easements, Easements by Estoppel, Easements of Necessity, and Easements by Implication. An overview of the easements that a court may find run across your property.

Obtaining a quorum at an annual HOA meeting can be difficult to impossible. This can create a myriad of problems, including the inability to elect new Board members. In the case of Parker Estates Homeowners Association v. Pattison, the court was confronted with a challenge to the practices of an HOA that had been unable to muster a quorum for years.

What documents is an owner entitled to request from an HOA? May the owner demand that copies be provided? Free of charge? That the HOA search its files for specific records? The answer differs between Oregon and Washington.

This post is part 4 of a 6-part series on Washington’s adverse possession doctrine. The adverse possession doctrine encompasses four elements: (1) open and notorious, (2) actual and uninterrupted, (3) exclusive, and (4) hostile. LeBleu v. Aalgaard, 193 Wn.App. 66, 78 (2016). This post will examine the “Actual and Uninterrupted” element, which requires the claimant to show that their possession of the disputed property was actual and uninterrupted for the ten-year statutory period. Even a temporary interruption may defeat a claim.

Adverse possession in Washington State requires a showing of: (1) open and notorious, (2) actual and uninterrupted, (3) exclusive, and (4) hostile possession of land for the statutory period. As noted by the Court of Appeals, these phrases are not clear and do not track with modern English. This post examines the first element, “Open and Notorious,” and how it has been interpreted by Washington Courts.