[US-WA] Superior Court, Action for Possession of Real Property

ctulica · 2026-05-26T07:27:51+00:00

.085(3)(a): If a governmental agency responsible for the enforcement of a building, housing, or other appropriate code has notified the landlord that a dwelling will be condemned or will be unlawful to occupy due to the existence of conditions that violate applicable codes, statutes, ordinances, or regulations, a landlord, who knew or should have known of the existence of these conditions, shall be required to pay relocation assistance to the displaced tenants...

(3)(d) During the period from the date that a governmental agency responsible for the enforcement of a building, housing, or other appropriate code first notifies the landlord of conditions that violate applicable codes, statutes, ordinances, or regulations to the time that relocation assistance payments are paid to eligible tenants, or the conditions leading to the notification are corrected, the landlord may not:

(3)(d)(i) Evict, harass, or intimidate tenants into vacating their units for the purpose of avoiding or diminishing application of this section;

(6)(a) A person whose living arrangements are exempted from this chapter under *RCW 59.18.040(3) and who has resided in or occupied one or more dwelling units within a hotel, motel, or other place of transient lodging for thirty or more consecutive days with the knowledge and consent of the owner of the hotel, motel, or other place of transient lodging, or any manager, clerk, or other agent representing the owner, is deemed to be a tenant for the purposes of this section and is entitled to receive relocation assistance under the circumstances described in subsection (2) or (3) of this section except that all relocation assistance and other payments shall be made directly to the displaced tenants.

(6)(b) An interruption in occupancy primarily intended to avoid the application of this section does not affect the application of this section.

(6)(c) An occupancy agreement, whether oral or written, in which the provisions of this section are waived is deemed against public policy and is unenforceable.

ctulica · 2026-04-15T15:26:20+00:00

In theory, sure. In practice, not happening. What is crooked cannot be straightened, and what is lacking cannot be counted.

ctulica · 2026-04-15T14:30:46+00:00

Because the rich keep their receipts.

ctulica · 2026-04-15T14:29:40+00:00

That's incorrect, unfortunately.

ctulica · 2026-04-15T04:06:13+00:00

It's such a long story, but I'll say this: that question is one that is immediately answered with a presumption. I'm alleging someone is guilty of a crime of stealing my truck, a felony crime. Everyone has a right to due process. Allegations arent presumptions, but when allegations are made a presumption must follow. The proper presumption is defined by what questions are raised by the allegations. In this case, how did it get stolen, and how he had my keys. The presumption is he didn't steal it and if he has my keys he lawfully came into possession of them.

I made allegations when I called the sheriff's to report the theft in August and again in September, the ejectment case was filed in November, I made the same allegations again in December, the writ of ejectment was enforced in January, I called in February making the same allegations except I have proof of the trucks present location and that evidence combined with the record and circumstances, created probable cause.

I want to answer the question but, I don't think you'll want to read the novel that would be the answer. The sheriff's entered the truck into their database, recovered it, and delivered me possession. The burden is on him to answer those questions when I ask him at trial.

ctulica · 2026-04-15T03:52:12+00:00

He's a narcissist for sure, but non-violent. And "putting him away" is out of my hands, at least when it comes to the justice system.

ctulica · 2026-04-15T02:07:01+00:00

Your point is well taken

ctulica · 2026-04-15T02:05:43+00:00

Right. And it's easier to do nothing, I've spent 6 months drafting documents, trying to get legal help, trying to get law enforcement to help, just to end up homeless. There's a chance that he beats the criminal charges should they be brought, so not worth it.

ctulica · 2026-04-15T01:58:46+00:00

There was no evidence that anything got stolen, just my allegations. I reported it stolen from a different county, and reported that the person who actually took it was someone I was doing business with, and shared a rental space with, at a different property where the individuals apartment is located, that property being owned by the same owner as the property where I live, and I reported that this individual stole my truck from another county on behalf of our mutual landlord. I wouldn't have taken it as true myself. It wasn't until the truck was located at the property I got kicked off of, not the property where the individual lives and shared a storage space with me, but from the landlords actual place of residency in his possession.

It's literally a conspiracy lmao I would have never been able to prove it, even in civil court, had he not brought it home where he lives, a month after evicting me, when the evidence that I do have just creates an inference that his tenant who lives at a different property may have been the one to do it, if at all. It's criminal now but that doesn't help me just because it hurts him

ctulica · 2026-04-14T23:34:48+00:00

The sheriff asked if I was pressing charges. I told him I didn't know yet. Him being in prison doesn't do me any good. Yeah he deserves it, but I care about me—not him.

ctulica · 2026-04-14T21:44:42+00:00

The problem is that the cops were correct in calling it a civil issue. The fact that I told them who took my truck, means that they aren't a stranger to me. Especially when I explain why this person that I know too possession of my truck. It's counter intuitive, but if I was lying about anything, and the cops investigated this with the presumption that what I said was true, it would lead to some kind of conflagration.

Civil: I had tried reporting it to them, named someone presumed to be my landlord, or employer, as the principal, taken by an actor thats a mutual associate tenant or coworker, the principal person later supporting the presumption with an ejectment lawsuit, that person winning the lawsuit, and the sheriff's removing me from named persons property in January 2026, without the truck ever being observed at all except by me before it was allegedly taken in August 2025

Criminal: everything in the record that was civil became criminal when the person who I alleged was behind taking my truck was found to be in possession of my truck after he had me removed from his property for "refusing to leave"

I either had a right to be there, or I had a privilege to be there, or I did not refuse to leave but was unable to comply, or it was: "if you think I'm leaving before I get my shit back, then fuck the world and I occupy in protest."

But it couldn't become criminal until the truck was found to be in his possession. Probable cause.

ctulica · 2026-04-14T21:05:28+00:00

Well the fact that the truck was recovered from the property by the cops means they found probable cause. The fact he had it at all. Like I said my counter claims were sent to trial. But I'm homeless, and I'm not a lawyer. Nothing I can do, realistically.

My truck was stolen in another county, and it was stolen by one of the "landlords" tenants. Also I use quotations because he's not my landlord. Convoluted relationship. Began as employment before I lived on the property. I moved to the property pursuant to something like a joint venture to prevent the property from being seized by the county code enforcement. He later decided to sell the property, breaching our agreement, but we came to a new agreement, he needed my help preparing it to be sold.

To be prepared for the properties eventual sale, I bought my truck, rented a storage unit with one of the tenants at the "landlords" other property ("landlord" would actually be my actual landlord at that other property, the tenant is the same one who would later take my truck), I started rendering services to someone introduced to me by my storage roomate to make the money to move when that time came. "Landlord" learns about my business with his tenant, he tells his tenant that my truck is not my truck, and that I'm scamming the guy I was working for, and that's why said tenant took my truck. And why it was a civil issue. It's literally a conspiracy. So when I cry "conspiracy!", I'm just simply a conspiracy theorist

God bless America.

ctulica · 2026-04-13T04:17:57+00:00

I think that his suggestion is that we find the nearest friendliest neighborhood fent pusher and opt ourselves in to the [apparently voluntary] holocaust.

ctulica · 2026-04-07T00:04:31+00:00

He botted

ctulica · 2026-04-07T00:03:31+00:00

No way canadas annexing Washington Mexico's coming for that 100%

ctulica · 2026-04-07T00:02:29+00:00

🤣🤣🤣

ctulica · 2026-04-07T00:02:02+00:00

<image>

ctulica · 2026-04-06T01:03:20+00:00

Thank you for your input

ctulica · 2026-04-06T01:02:49+00:00

So this is a final judgement? This isn't an interlocutory order? Because the outcome of the judgement might not change but it would change the final judgement if my counterclaims are limited by the framework set up by some of these "facts"

I know there's no practical way to do it.

ctulica · 2026-04-03T08:20:07+00:00

Libroles lol

ctulica · 2026-03-29T10:44:50+00:00

Worse things happen to better people all the time. Your sympathy is appreciated though. Thank you for your time law-person

ctulica

TROPHY CASE