In Re The Estate Of Darlene B. Snider, 49410-8

Darlene Snider died intestate in 2014; surviving parties included husband Bradley Milligan and sons Kenneth and Dennis Crogg. A dispute arose over a vacant lot adjacent to the marital home.
The estate initially obtained a 2015 appraisal by Kirstin Moe valuing the lot at $150,000.
Parties entered a TEDRA non-judicial binding settlement giving Milligan the first option to purchase the lot “based upon a current appraised value to be obtained by [the Croggs] within 60 days,” with 30 days to exercise after delivery of the appraisal; the agreement allowed enforcement and attorney fees.
The Croggs later procured a 2016 appraisal by Jeffrey Yohe valuing the lot at $460,000. Milligan moved to compel compliance, arguing the Yohe appraisal was unreliable and seeking a neutral appraisal; the trial court ordered a neutral third appraisal.
The Croggs moved under CR 60(b)(11) to vacate the court’s order and to enforce the settlement as written (arguing Milligan’s 30‑day option had expired after receipt of Yohe’s appraisal). The trial court denied relief; the Croggs appealed only the denial of CR 60(b) relief.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Croggs)	Defendant's Argument (Milligan)	Held
Adequacy of appellate record	Croggs assumed record sufficed without transcripts	Milligan argued absent hearing transcripts the record is inadequate	Court: record minimally sufficient for review (settlement, appraisals, motions, orders present)
Scope of appeal	Croggs sought review of trial court’s April 22 enforcement order	Milligan argued appeal is limited to August 5 denial of CR 60(b) relief	Court: appeal limited to August 5 order denying CR 60(b) relief; underlying April 22 order not reviewed
CR 60(b)(11) relief — enforcement of settlement	Croggs argued the court must enforce the settlement as written and not order another appraisal	Milligan argued trial court reasonably ordered neutral appraisal given discrepancy between appraisals	Court: denial of CR 60(b)(11) relief affirmed — no extraordinary circumstances shown and legal errors are not remedied by CR 60(b)(11)
Attorney fees	Croggs sought fees under RCW 11.96A.150 for Milligan’s motion to compel	Milligan sought fees on appeal under settlement and RCW 11.96A.150	Court: trial court didn’t abuse discretion in not awarding Croggs fees; appellate fees awarded to Milligan as equitable under RCW 11.96A.150 and settlement provisions

Jones v. City of Seattle, 314 P.3d 380 (Wash. 2013) (standard: CR 60(b) discretionary review)
Union Bank, N.A. v. Vanderhoek Assocs., LLC, 365 P.3d 223 (Wash. App. 2015) (abuse of discretion defined; CR 60(b)(11) confined to extraordinary circumstances)
Stiles v. Kearney, 277 P.3d 9 (Wash. App. 2012) (appellant bears burden to perfect record on appeal)
Barr v. MacGugan, 78 P.3d 660 (Wash. App. 2003) (appeal from CR 60(b) limited to propriety of denial, not underlying judgment)
Tatham v. Rogers, 283 P.3d 583 (Wash. App. 2012) (definition of extraordinary circumstances under CR 60(b)(11))
State v. Gamble, 225 P.3d 973 (Wash. 2010) (extraordinary circumstances are generally outside a party’s control)
Sloans v. Berry, 358 P.3d 426 (Wash. App. 2015) (RCW 11.96A.150 grants broad equitable discretion for attorney fees in estate proceedings)