Northwest Television Club Inc v. Gross Seattle, Inc.
| Decision Date | 09 February 1982 |
| Docket Number | No. 47204-1,47204-1 |
| Citation | 96 Wn.2d 973,640 P.2d 710 |
| Parties | NORTHWEST TELEVISION CLUB, INC., Respondent, v. GROSS SEATTLE, INC., et al., Petitioners. |
| Court | Washington Supreme Court |
It is hereby ordered that the opinion in the above cause, as the same appears at 96 Wash.2d 104, 634 P.2d 837, be changed as follows:
1. Footnote reference number "3" which follows the word "days." on page 113, line 1 (of 96 Wash.2d, on page 841, line 27, second column, of 634 P.2d), and footnote 3 at the bottom of page 113 (page 841 of 634 P.2d) are deleted.
2. The following text and footnote is inserted after the paragraph ending in the first line of page 113 ():
The only variation of any substance between the two offers was that the third party offerors held title to their residence while lessee's principal shareholder Beryl Bedker 3. The last sentence of the majority opinion beginning on line 14, page 116 (), is changed to read as follows:
formerly Beryl Kahler, not lessee itself, claimed to own the residence referred to in lessee's offer. However, the record does not indicate that a distinction was made by the parties or the court as to the identity or ownership of the property insofar as the willingness and ability of the lessee to sell the property as part of the offer was concerned. The parties stipulated in the Court of Appeals that Mrs. Bedker was the alter ego of the lessee corporation at the time the offer was made. 3 Lessor never rejected the offer for the reason that lessee's principal stockholder and not lessee held title to the property, and such a defense to the action was not specifically raised in the pleadings. In fact, the record indicates that lessor treated lessee's and Bedker's interest in the property as the same. Indeed, lessor in its April 5, 1974, letter to its attorney, exhibit 7, enclosing the purchase offer and earnest money stated the documents were "from Mrs. Kahler of N. W. Television Club Inc." Further, in its "Notice to Terminate Tenancy" 3 months later, exhibit 10, lessor noted that it was not waiving any defaults of lessee "in failing to exercise her right of first refusal to purchase the above described real property by her failure to submit an offer in accordance with the terms accepted by Lessor from its proposed purchaser on the agreement dated March 28, 1974." (Italics ours.) In addition, lessor brought the
unlawful detainer action in the following year against Beryl Kahler, a single woman, and Northwest Television Club, Inc. It follows that lessor was at no greater disadvantage by the ownership status of the residence mentioned in lessee's offer than by that contained in the third party offer, and the Court of Appeals so held
The Court of Appeals is affirmed in part, reversed in part, and...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
West Texas Transmission, L.P. v. Enron Corp.
...S.W.2d at 252; Northwest Television Club v. Gross Seattle Inc., 96 Wash.2d 973, 634 P.2d 837, 840 (1981), opinion modified by 96 Wash.2d 973, 640 P.2d 710 (1982); Matson, 676 P.2d at 1032. The property owner remains free to accept this counter-offer or to sell the property to the third part......
-
Satomi Owners Ass'n v. Satomi, LLC
...it is the substantially prevailing party on this appeal and should be awarded its costs. See Nw. Television Club, Inc. v. Gross Seattle, Inc., 96 Wash.2d 973, 986, 640 P.2d 710 (1982). ¶ 64 We deny the requests of both parties for attorney fees, however, because our decision is not determin......
-
McClarty v. Totem Elec.
...neither party has substantially prevailed, and the parties must bear their own costs. See Nw. Television Club, Inc. v. Gross Seattle, Inc., 96 Wash.2d 973, 985-86, 640 P.2d 710 (1982). The trial court may also consider fees after disposing of the case on ¶ 47 Where the legislature employs a......
-
Estate of Niehenke, Matter of
...This conclusion comports with other case law from this court. In Northwest Television Club, Inc. v. Gross Seattle, Inc., 96 Wash.2d 973, 984-85, 640 P.2d 710 (1981), this court held that if closing had occurred as specified (in the earnest money agreement), the lessee would have become vend......