DO v. FARMER

No. 54323-7-I.

110 P.3d 840 (2005)

Du K. DO and Tran T. Tran, individually and the marital community composed thereof, Appellants/Cross Respondents, v. Laurie E. FARMER and John Doe Farmer, individually and the marital community composed thereof, Defendants, and Michael G. Getty and Jane Doe Getty, individually and the marital community composed thereof, Respondents/Cross Appellants.

Court of Appeals of Washington, Division 1.

April 25, 2005.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Christopher M. Davis, Attorney at Law, Bellevue, WA, for Appellants.

David J. Bierman, Alexander & Bierman PS, Seattle, WA, Mistee R. Verhulp, Attorney at Law, Kennewick, WA, for Respondents.


BAKER, J.

¶ 1 Following mandatory arbitration, Michael Getty requested a trial de novo, but later made a CR 68 offer of judgment which Tran T. Tran and Du K. Do accepted. The resulting judgment did not improve Getty's position from the arbitration. Mandatory Arbitration Rule 7.3 provides that a party who requests a trial de novo following mandatory arbitration and does not improve his position must pay reasonable attorney fees. But MAR 7.3 also provides that...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases