Millay v. Cam
Court of Appeals of Washington
1Opinion of the CourtBridgewater, J.
In this case, which concerns serial redemptions of real property, we are asked to decide whether a prospective redemptioner’s declaratory action to dispute the "sum required” to redeem under RCW 6.23.080 is equal to tendering payment or tolls the statutory redemption period. We hold that, because the statute requires payment within a specified period, filing a declaratory action neither tolls the running of the period of redemption nor acts as payment. We affirm.
This lawsuit involves property known as Biba Hot Springs Resort, Inc. Biba defaulted on its loans, mortgagees foreclosed on the…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- United Parcel Service, Inc. v. Department of RevenueWashington Supreme Court · 1984
- Clallam County Deputy Sheriff's Guild v. Board of Clallam County CommissionersWashington Supreme Court · 1979
- DiNino v. StateWashington Supreme Court · 1984
- Shum v. Department of Labor & IndustriesCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1991
- Fidelity Mutual Savings Bank v. MarkWashington Supreme Court · 1989
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Millay v. CamWashington Supreme Court · 1998
- Millay v. CamWashington Supreme Court · 1998
- Le Tastevin, Inc. v. Seattle First National BankCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1999