Legal Opinion

City Of Kent v. Bel Air & Briney

Court of Appeals of Washington

Decided September 14, 2015No. 71544-5-IPublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Spearman, C. J. —

¶ 1 When the city of Kent (City) bought the property that is the subject of this action, it paid off the first position hen but did not discover the junior hen until *170after the proceeds had been disbursed. The City filed a complaint for declaratory relief, seeking equitable subro-gation to the prior first position lienholder and the right to foreclose on the resulting equitable lien. On the City’s motion for summary judgment, the trial court granted the requested relief. The junior lienholders appeal, claiming the trial court erred in so ruling because they will be materially…

Also in this document: Concurrence.

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Bank of America, NA v. Prestance Corp.Washington Supreme Court · 2007
  2. Bank of America v. Prestance Corp.Washington Supreme Court · 2007
  3. Hu Hyun Kim v. LeeWashington Supreme Court · 2001
  4. Burgoon v. LavezzoCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1937
  5. City of Spokane v. Security Savings SocietyWashington Supreme Court · 1907

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. In Re Se. Eye Ctr. (Old Battleground v. Ccsea)North Carolina Business Court · 2019
  2. City of Kent v. Bel Air & BrineyWashington Supreme Court · 2016

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API