JACKSON v. JACKSON, 22168-3-II

• Decision Date: 09 April 1999
• Docket Number: No. 22168-3-II,22168-3-II
• Court: Washington Court of Appeals
• Parties: MARY ANN JACKSON, A SINGLE WOMAN, RESPONDENT, v. MICHAEL CRAIG JACKSON, A SINGLE MAN, APPELLANT

[1]
[2]	MARY ANN JACKSON, A SINGLE WOMAN, RESPONDENT,; v.; MICHAEL CRAIG JACKSON, A SINGLE MAN, APPELLANT
[3]	No. 22168-3-II
[4]	Washington Court of Appeals
[5]	Docket No: 95-2-03628-9
[6]	April 09, 1999
[7]	Counsel: Counsel for Appellant(s) Michael C. Jackson (Appearing Pro Se) 6040 Alpine Rd SE Olalla, WA 98359 Counsel for Respondent(s) Chirstina Matchett Attorney At Law 4301 S Pine #463 Tacoma, WA 98409 James D. Maloney Iii Weeks & Skala 3910 Summitview Ste 210 Yakima, WA 98902-2780
[8]	Source of Appeal: Appeal from Superior Court of Kitsap County
[9]	Judgement or order under review
[10]	Date filed: 08/19/1997
[11]	Judge signing: Hon. Terry K. McCluskey
[12]	Judges: Authored by Karen G. Seinfeld
[13]	Concurring: J. Dean Morgan Carroll C. Bridgewater
[14]	[Editor's note: originally released as an unpublished opinion]
[15]	SEINFELD, J.
[16]	- Michael Jackson appeals the denial of his CR 60 motion to vacate Judgement. In particular, he seeks vacation of a Judgement that divided the property he and Mary Jackson owned or acquired during their 20-year meretricious relationship and which established a parenting plan. Finding no merit to his allegations, we affirm.
[17]	FACTS*fn1
[18]	Michael and Mary lived together from 1974 until October 1994, holding themselves out as husband and wife, although they never married. In 1975, they began purchasing property in Olalla, Washington, which, at the time of their separation, had a fair market value of $110,000; they also had two children, Amon, born in 1977 and Cyrus, born in 1979. Mary provided most of the financial support for the family, working primarily as a waitress, while Michael pursued "art and music for his own inner and personal satisfaction."
[19]	In April 1994, Mary's mother quit-claimed a one-half interest in a house she owned in Gig Harbor to Mary. The quitclaim deed created a joint tenancy with right of survivorship between Mary and her mother. Mary did not convey any interest in this house to Michael.
[20]	Mary then applied for the necessary permits to operate a bed and breakfast in the Gig Harbor home and after separating from Michael, she independently obtained a $30,000 loan to finance the remodeling. In June 1995, Mary obtained her business license and began operating the bed and breakfast. In December 1995, Mary petitioned the superior court for an order dividing the Jackson property, establishing a parenting plan, and determining child support. Two months later, Michael filed a pro se "counter claim" alleging, among other things, that (1) Mary had no interest in the real property in Olalla but she "is 50% responsible for the debt incurred by her at the purchase of said property"; (2) he "is deserving of 50% interest in any business at the Dorotich St. property, in Gig Harbor"; and (3) he "deserves 50% of the 50% share of the Dorotich St. real property that {Mary} was gifted by her mother" before their separation. Subsequently, Mary moved for a partial summary Judgement that the Gig Harbor property and the bed and breakfast business were her separate property. After a hearing at which Michael failed to appear, the trial court granted Mary's motion.
[21]	The trial court conducted the trial on September 3, 1996; Michael again failed to appear despite repeated efforts by court personnel to notify him that trial was proceeding as scheduled. On September 27, the trial court entered findings of fact and Conclusions of law and a Judgement that, among other things, appointed Mary the primary residential parent, required Michael to pay $446 per month in child support, and awarded Mary one-half of the fair market value of the Olalla property. This latter award required Michael to execute a promissory note in the amount of $55,000, payable to Mary within 10 years of the Judgement, and also to execute a deed of trust securing the note.
[22]	When Michael refused to sign the promissory note and deed of trust, the trial court, pursuant to CR 70, appointed another individual to execute the documents. Meanwhile, on October 7, ten days after entry of the Judgement, Michael filed, among other documents, a CR 59 motion for reconsideration, and mailed the same to Mary's counsel, which counsel did not receive until October 9.
[23]	On November 21, the court denied Michael's motion for reconsideration because service upon Mary was not timely in accordance with CR 59(b) and CR 5(b)(2). The court also denied a motion to vacate the Judgement based on insufficiency of the evidence (not a proper ground), a motion to vacate a default Judgement (none was entered), requests for discovery, to strike documents from the record, to remove Mary's counsel (unsupported by relevant authority), and a request for a new Judge (untimely).
[24]	In February 1997, Mary moved to hold Michael in contempt because he refused to turn over certain paintings that the court awarded to her as part of the Judgement.

...