The Lodges in West Yakima, LLC v. David Perez Ortiz
40087-5
| Wash. Ct. App. | Jun 3, 2025Background
- David Perez Ortiz and Mary Jane Frassinetti leased an apartment from The Lodges in West Yakima, LLC and fell behind on rent in August and September 2023.
- The Lodges issued a 14-day notice to pay or vacate, including late fees and other expenses, which was personally delivered to Frassinetti.
- After failed attempts at personal service for an unlawful detainer action, the court permitted service by posting and mailing documents to the apartment.
- Ortiz appeared at the show cause hearing pro se, advancing “sovereign citizen” arguments that he was outside the court’s jurisdiction.
- The superior court granted The Lodges a writ of restitution to recover possession of the apartment.
- On appeal, Ortiz (now represented by counsel) claimed defects in service and notice, and challenged inclusion of late fees in the notice.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of Service & Notice | Service and notice defective | Proper service and notice provided | Waived—First raised on appeal, not jurisdictional |
| Jurisdiction over Defendant | Court lacked jurisdiction | Court has jurisdiction over tenants | Court had subject matter & personal jurisdiction |
| Defective Notice (late fees) | Notice invalid for including fees | Notice was properly calculated | Waived—Issue not raised at trial court |
| Right to Challenge Issues on Appeal | Can challenge defects on appeal | Issues must be raised in trial court | Not reviewable per RAP 2.5(a) |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Hart, 701 F.2d 749 (8th Cir. 1983) (sovereign citizen arguments universally rejected by courts)
- United States v. Schneider, 910 F.2d 1569 (7th Cir. 1990) (sovereign arguments do not immunize from legal obligations)
- In re Estate of Fitzgerald, 172 Wn. App. 437 (2012) (personal jurisdictional defenses waived if not timely raised)
- Pellino v. Brink’s, Inc., 164 Wn. App. 668 (2011) (issues not raised in trial court are not reviewable on appeal)
