Hudson v. Hapner

Summary

The Washington Supreme Court held that Washington's mandatory arbitration rules imply a unilateral right to withdraw a request for a trial de novo. However, the court concluded that withdrawal must occur before the start of trial proceedings and therefore remanded the case for a new trial. The court also addressed attorney-fee and cost requests under MAR 7.3 and RAP 14.2.

Holdings

1. RCW 7.06.060(1) and MAR 7.3 imply a party's unilateral right to withdraw a request for a trial de novo without the opposing party's consent.
2. The unilateral right to withdraw a request for a trial de novo must be exercised before the start of trial proceedings.
3. Hudson preserved her claims for attorney fees and costs by devoting a separate section of each appellate brief to the request and citing MAR 7.3 and supporting authority; the requests were not invalid merely because they were contingent on prevailing.
4. Hapner substantially prevailed in the first appeal because he obtained reversal of the trial-de-novo result and a remand for a new trial, so the Court of Appeals correctly awarded him appellate costs under RAP 14.2. That determination is distinct from Hudson's potential entitlement to fees and costs under MAR 7.3 after the retrial.

Questions Presented

1. Whether RCW 7.06.060(1) and MAR 7.3 create a unilateral right to withdraw a request for a trial de novo.
2. If such a unilateral right exists, when must it be exercised?
3. Whether Hudson preserved her requests for attorney fees and costs under RAP 18.1(b) and MAR 7.3.
4. Whether Hapner was the substantially prevailing party entitled to appellate costs under RAP 14.2.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded