1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. P.3d
  4. 150 P.3d
  5. 150 P.3d 120 (2007)
 

VANDERPOL v. SCHOTZKO

No. 57616-0-I.

150 P.3d 120 (2007)

Karen E. VANDERPOL, Respondent, v. Christopher SCHOTZKO and Jane Doe Schotzko, his wife, and their marital community, Appellants, and David D. VAN and Jane Doe Van, his wife, and their marital community, Defendants.

Court of Appeals of Washington, Division 1.

January 2, 2007.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Marilee C. Erickson, Terry Jay Price, Reed McClure, Susan R. Hamilton, Law Offices of Sharon J. Bitcon, Seattle, for Appellants.

Douglas P. Levinson, Attorney at Law, Kent, for Respondents.

Dylan E. Jackson, Wilson Smith Cochran Dickerson, Seattle, for Defendants.

ELLINGTON, J.

¶ 1 In this case we once again delve into the requirements for obtaining a trial de novo after mandatory arbitration. We hold that the MAR 7.1 requirement of proof that a copy has been served is satisfied by an affidavit attesting that a copy of the request was mailed to all parties at least three days before the deadline for service. We therefore reinstate the request for trial de novo and remand for further proceedings.

BACKGROUND...

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