Bing Kung Association v. Sign Cho Ng
74251-5
| Wash. Ct. App. | Nov 6, 2017Background
- Defendant/Appellant Sing Cho Ng lost in superior court and a final judgment was entered on August 25, 2015.
- Ng filed several post-judgment motions in September 2015: a “Resubmitted Motion for More Definite Statement,” a “Renewed Motion for Reconsideration,” a motion to vacate a writ of restitution, a motion for extension of time to file an appeal, and a motion to stay enforcement of the judgment.
- The superior court denied each motion in an October 5, 2015 order for reasons explained below.
- Ng appealed the superior court’s October 5 order to the Court of Appeals, Division One.
- The Court of Appeals reviewed denials of reconsideration and CR 60(b) relief for manifest abuse of discretion and affirmed all rulings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Timeliness of “Resubmitted Motion for More Definite Statement” (reconsideration) | Ng argued the court should consider the motion on its merits | Superior court argued the motion was a CR 59 reconsideration and was filed after the 10-day deadline | Denied — motion untimely under CR 59(b); no abuse of discretion |
| Timeliness of “Renewed Motion for Reconsideration” | Ng argued court should reconsider judgment | Superior court argued it was filed after 10-day CR 59(b) deadline | Denied — untimely; no abuse of discretion |
| Motion for Extension of Time to File Appeal | Ng requested additional time to appeal | Superior court contended it lacked authority to extend appellate filing deadline; only appellate court may do so | Denied — only appellate court has jurisdiction to permit late notice of appeal (trial court cannot extend) |
| Motion to Vacate Writ of Restitution (CR 60(b)) | Ng sought relief from the writ, claiming grounds for vacation | Superior court found no meritorious basis for CR 60(b) relief | Denied — no manifest abuse of discretion in denying CR 60(b) relief |
| Motion to Stay Enforcement of Judgment | Ng asked for a stay pending appeal without posting bond | Superior court required supersedeas bond per RAP procedure | Denied — stay denied because Ng did not post a supersedeas bond |
Key Cases Cited
- Jacob's Meadow Owners Ass'n v. Plateau 44 II, LLC, 139 Wn. App. 743, 162 P.3d 1153 (2007) (reconsideration reviewed for manifest abuse of discretion)
- Haley v. Highland, 142 Wn.2d 135, 12 P.3d 119 (2000) (standard of review for CR 60(b) motions)
- State v. PiIon, 23 Wn. App. 609, 596 P.2d 664 (1979) (appellate court has exclusive jurisdiction to permit late notice of appeal)