Court Case

• “The City’s application of the 75/80 rule was clearly erroneous..”
• “The City’s decision that lots 10 and 11 meet the 75/80 rule is REVERSED.”

– Decision of King County Superior Judge Spearman

Here are the main documents outlining the main arguments for each side in the court case.   There are actually hundreds of documents submitted for this court case.

The docs demonstrate how complicated, obscure and vague the loopholes are, and how very few people really have access to these laws.  These are the laws that affect your home, your neighborhood and your biggest investment.

I. Original Court Case

• A. Benchview’s Opening Brief
• B1. Response from City
• B2. Response from developer 
• C. Benchview’s Reply
• D. Judge Spearman’s Decision

II. Request for Reconsideration

Members of Benchview believe we won based on the Judge’s decision.  But it’s not over.  Duffus’  asked the judge to reconsider her decision.  This costs the neighborhood even more money.

   A. Duffus Documents

• II.A.1. Opening Statement from Law Firm w/ Background
• II.A.2. Motion for Reconsideration
• II.A.3. Declaration from Ron Day
• II.A.4. Proposed ORDER from Duffus

  B. Benchview Response

• II. B.1. Benchview Objections to Reconsideration
• II. B.2. Sansone Declaration 2
• II. B.3. Allen Declaration 4
• II. B. Photo 610, II. B. Photo 612, II. B. Photo 613, II. B. Photo 614

  C. Duffus Reply

• II. C.1. Reply Motion for Reconsideration
• II. C.2. Day Declaration 2

D. Judge’s Decision: Request Denied

• II. D. Judge Denies Duffus’ Request for Reconsideration