Frank Decaro v. Spokane County
198 Wash. App. 638
| Wash. Ct. App. | 2017Background
- Jessica Alvarado died in Spokane County Jail on August 13, 2012; her estate sued Spokane County for wrongful death and related claims.
- The Estate filed a tort claim July 17, 2015 and sued September 18, 2015; Spokane County was served September 22, 2015.
- County risk-management personnel failed to forward the complaint to defense counsel; no timely appearance was filed.
- The Estate obtained a default and, on December 2, 2015, a default judgment for $8,000,546.25. County counsel first appeared December 3 and answered December 9, 2015.
- Spokane County moved under CR 60(b)(1) to set aside the default and judgment, asserting inadvertent mistake, a prima facie defense (including that Alvarado declined care), prompt action after learning of the judgment, and an offer to pay certain fees; the trial court granted the motion.
- The Estate appealed, arguing the trial court misapplied the White v. Holm factors and abused its discretion; the Court of Appeals affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (DeCaro/ Estate) | Defendant's Argument (Spokane County) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court abused its discretion in vacating the default judgment | County had no valid excuse for default and no strong defense; White factors not met | County’s failure to answer was inadvertent/excusable, it has at least a prima facie defense, and it acted promptly | No abuse of discretion; court properly applied White and vacated the default to allow a merits trial |
| Whether the trial court applied the correct legal standard (White factors) | Court relied on policy favoring merits over default and thus misapplied White | Court applied White’s four-factor test and cited merits-preference only as supporting policy | Court correctly applied White factors and considered policy as consistent with those factors |
| Whether the Estate is entitled to appellate attorney fees and costs | Estate sought costs/fees as prevailing party after reversal | County’s prior offer covered only fees/costs related to obtaining the default and opposing the motion to vacate, not appellate fees; Estate is not prevailing party | Denied — Estate is not prevailing party for RAP 14.2/RAP 18.1(a) fee entitlement |
Key Cases Cited
- White v. Holm, 73 Wn.2d 348 (1968) (establishes four-factor test for vacating default judgments)
- Griggs v. Averbeck Realty, Inc., 92 Wn.2d 576 (1979) (review of vacating default judged for abuse of discretion; favors deciding cases on the merits)
- Morin v. Burris, 160 Wn.2d 745 (2007) (states strong policy preference for giving parties their day in court)
- Johnson v. Cash Store, 116 Wn. App. 833 (2003) (applied White; defendant’s inexcusable manager conduct defeated vacatur despite prima facie defenses)
- Little v. King, 160 Wn.2d 696 (2007) (no equitable basis to vacate if there is no prima facie defense and no excusable reason for default)
- State ex rel. Carroll v. Junker, 79 Wn.2d 12 (1969) (abuse of discretion standard explained)