{"attribution":{"source":"legal.exploreworldai.com","canonical":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=us:washctapp-40591-5-2025-10-14","cite_as":"NovaCopilot, legal.exploreworldai.com (https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=us:washctapp-40591-5-2025-10-14)","license":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/revision","version":"legal-2026-10-18","fingerprint":"ewai:us:efda2f","proof":"sha256:5a8bc730ad2c5f2dae219ceb9deb6dcdb8c64b5214a14cfb7fda8de1576d4b75","jurisdiction":"us","lang":"en","publisher":"NovaCopilot by ExploreWorld Legal","terms":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/om"},"brand_source":"Source: NovaCopilot","item":{"schema_version":"1.0.0","id":"us:washctapp-40591-5-2025-10-14","jurisdiction":"us","lang":"en","brand_source":"Source: NovaCopilot","brand":{"product":"NovaCopilot","platform":"ExploreWorldAI","infrastructure":"ExploreWorld Legal","infrastructure_url":"legal.exploreworldai.com","legal_entity":"Valkiv Ventures AB","permanent_url":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/novacopilot","source":"Source: NovaCopilot","powered_by":"Powered by NovaCopilot","license":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/licensvillkor"},"sections":[{"title":"Front matter","paragraphs":["para_1","para_2","para_3","para_4","para_5","para_6","para_7","para_8","para_9","para_10","para_11","para_12","para_13","para_14","para_15","para_16","para_17","para_18","para_19","para_20","para_21","para_22","para_23","para_24","para_25","para_26","para_27","para_28","para_29","para_30","para_31","para_32","para_33","para_34","para_35","para_36","para_37","para_38","para_39","para_40","para_41","para_42","para_43","para_44","para_45","para_46","para_47","para_48","para_49","para_50","para_51","para_52","para_53","para_54","para_55","para_56","para_57","para_58","para_59","para_60","para_61","para_62","para_63","para_64","para_65","para_66","para_67","para_68","para_69","para_70","para_71","para_72","para_73","para_74","para_75","para_76","para_77","para_78","para_79","para_80","para_81","para_82","para_83","para_84","para_85","para_86","para_87","para_88","para_89","para_90","para_91","para_92","para_93","para_94","para_95","para_96","para_97","para_98","para_99","para_100","para_101","para_102","para_103","para_104","para_105","para_106","para_107","para_108","para_109","para_110","para_111","para_112","para_113","para_114","para_115","para_116","para_117","para_118","para_119","para_120","para_121","para_122","para_123","para_124","para_125","para_126","para_127","para_128","para_129","para_130","para_131","para_132","para_133","para_134","para_135","para_136","para_137","para_138","para_139","para_140","para_141","para_142","para_143","para_144","para_145","para_146","para_147","para_148","para_149","para_150","para_151","para_152","para_153","para_154","para_155","para_156","para_157"],"kind":"front_matter"},{"title":"Summary judgment is proper if “there is no genuine issue” of “material fact and that the","paragraphs":["para_158","para_159","para_160","para_161","para_162","para_163","para_164","para_165","para_166","para_167","para_168","para_169","para_170","para_171","para_172","para_173","para_174","para_175","para_176","para_177","para_178","para_179","para_180","para_181","para_182","para_183","para_184","para_185","para_186","para_187","para_188","para_189","para_190","para_191","para_192","para_193","para_194","para_195","para_196","para_197","para_198","para_199","para_200","para_201","para_202","para_203","para_204","para_205","para_206","para_207","para_208","para_209","para_210","para_211","para_212","para_213","para_214","para_215","para_216","para_217","para_218","para_219","para_220","para_221","para_222","para_223","para_224","para_225","para_226","para_227","para_228","para_229","para_230","para_231","para_232","para_233","para_234","para_235","para_236","para_237","para_238","para_239","para_240","para_241","para_242","para_243","para_244","para_245","para_246","para_247","para_248","para_249","para_250","para_251","para_252","para_253","para_254","para_255","para_256","para_257","para_258","para_259","para_260","para_261","para_262","para_263","para_264","para_265","para_266","para_267","para_268","para_269","para_270","para_271","para_272","para_273","para_274","para_275","para_276","para_277","para_278","para_279","para_280","para_281","para_282","para_283","para_284","para_285","para_286","para_287","para_288","para_289","para_290","para_291","para_292","para_293","para_294","para_295","para_296","para_297","para_298","para_299","para_300","para_301","para_302","para_303","para_304","para_305","para_306","para_307","para_308","para_309","para_310","para_311","para_312","para_313","para_314","para_315","para_316","para_317","para_318","para_319","para_320","para_321","para_322","para_323","para_324","para_325","para_326","para_327","para_328","para_329","para_330","para_331","para_332","para_333","para_334","para_335","para_336","para_337","para_338","para_339","para_340","para_341","para_342","para_343","para_344","para_345","para_346","para_347","para_348","para_349","para_350","para_351","para_352","para_353","para_354","para_355","para_356","para_357","para_358","para_359","para_360","para_361","para_362","para_363","para_364","para_365","para_366","para_367","para_368","para_369","para_370","para_371","para_372","para_373","para_374","para_375","para_376","para_377","para_378","para_379","para_380","para_381","para_382","para_383","para_384","para_385","para_386","para_387","para_388","para_389","para_390","para_391","para_392","para_393","para_394","para_395","para_396","para_397","para_398","para_399","para_400","para_401","para_402","para_403","para_404","para_405","para_406","para_407","para_408","para_409","para_410","para_411","para_412","para_413","para_414","para_415","para_416","para_417","para_418","para_419","para_420","para_421","para_422","para_423","para_424","para_425","para_426","para_427","para_428","para_429","para_430","para_431","para_432","para_433","para_434","para_435","para_436","para_437","para_438","para_439","para_440","para_441","para_442","para_443","para_444","para_445","para_446","para_447","para_448","para_449"],"kind":"summary"}],"paragraphs":[{"text":"NOTICE: SLIP OPINION","paragraph_id":"para_1"},{"text":"(not the court’s final written decision)","paragraph_id":"para_2"},{"text":"The opinion that begins on the next page is a slip opinion. Slip opinions are the","paragraph_id":"para_3"},{"text":"written opinions that are originally filed by the court.","paragraph_id":"para_4"},{"text":"A slip opinion is not necessarily the court’s final written decision. Slip opinions","paragraph_id":"para_5"},{"text":"can be changed by subsequent court orders. For example, a court may issue an","paragraph_id":"para_6"},{"text":"order making substantive changes to a slip opinion or publishing for precedential","paragraph_id":"para_7"},{"text":"purposes a previously “unpublished” opinion. Additionally, nonsubstantive edits","paragraph_id":"para_8"},{"text":"(for style, grammar, citation, format, punctuation, etc.) are made before the","paragraph_id":"para_9"},{"text":"opinions that have precedential value are published in the official reports of court","paragraph_id":"para_10"},{"text":"decisions: the Washington Reports 2d and the Washington Appellate Reports. An","paragraph_id":"para_11"},{"text":"opinion in the official reports replaces the slip opinion as the official opinion of","paragraph_id":"para_12"},{"text":"the court.","paragraph_id":"para_13"},{"text":"The slip opinion that begins on the next page is for a published opinion, and it","paragraph_id":"para_14"},{"text":"has since been revised for publication in the printed official reports. The official","paragraph_id":"para_15"},{"text":"text of the court’s opinion is found in the advance sheets and the bound volumes","paragraph_id":"para_16"},{"text":"of the official reports. Also, an electronic version (intended to mirror the","paragraph_id":"para_17"},{"text":"language found in the official reports) of the revised opinion can be found, free of","paragraph_id":"para_18"},{"text":"charge, at this website: https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports.","paragraph_id":"para_19"},{"text":"For more information about precedential (published) opinions, nonprecedential","paragraph_id":"para_20"},{"text":"(unpublished) opinions, slip opinions, and the official reports, see","paragraph_id":"para_21"},{"text":"https://www.courts.wa.gov/opinions and the information that is linked there.","paragraph_id":"para_22"},{"text":"IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON","paragraph_id":"para_23"},{"text":"DIVISION THREE","paragraph_id":"para_24"},{"text":"JONATHAN D. CLAUSEN and LILAC","paragraph_id":"para_25"},{"text":"CITY, LLC, a Washington Limited","paragraph_id":"para_26"},{"text":"Liability Company, dba LILAC CITY","paragraph_id":"para_27"},{"text":"PAINTING,","paragraph_id":"para_28"},{"text":"Appellant,","paragraph_id":"para_29"},{"text":"v.","paragraph_id":"para_30"},{"text":"WBL SPO I, LLC, a Delaware Limited","paragraph_id":"para_31"},{"text":"Liability Company, and WORLD","paragraph_id":"para_32"},{"text":"BUSINESS LENDER, LLC, a NEW","paragraph_id":"para_33"},{"text":"YORK Limited Liability Company,","paragraph_id":"para_34"},{"text":"Respondent.","paragraph_id":"para_35"},{"text":")","paragraph_id":"para_36"},{"text":")","paragraph_id":"para_37"},{"text":")","paragraph_id":"para_38"},{"text":")","paragraph_id":"para_39"},{"text":")","paragraph_id":"para_40"},{"text":")","paragraph_id":"para_41"},{"text":")","paragraph_id":"para_42"},{"text":")","paragraph_id":"para_43"},{"text":")","paragraph_id":"para_44"},{"text":")","paragraph_id":"para_45"},{"text":")","paragraph_id":"para_46"},{"text":")","paragraph_id":"para_47"},{"text":")","paragraph_id":"para_48"},{"text":")","paragraph_id":"para_49"},{"text":")","paragraph_id":"para_50"},{"text":"No. 40591-5-III","paragraph_id":"para_51"},{"text":"PUBLISHED OPINION","paragraph_id":"para_52"},{"text":"STAAB, A.C.J. — In this appeal, we interpret the term “borrower” as used in the","paragraph_id":"para_53"},{"text":"Washington Consumer Loan Act (CLA), chapter 31.04 RCW. The CLA applies to","paragraph_id":"para_54"},{"text":"various loans made to Washington residents but does not apply to loans made “primarily","paragraph_id":"para_55"},{"text":"for business, commercial, or agricultural purposes unless the loan is secured by a lien on","paragraph_id":"para_56"},{"text":"the borrower’s primary dwelling.” RCW 31.04.025(4)(e).","paragraph_id":"para_57"},{"text":"World Business Lender (WBL) made a business loan to Lilac City LLC, a","paragraph_id":"para_58"},{"text":"company owned by Jonathan Clausen. Clausen personally guaranteed the loan, and the","paragraph_id":"para_59"},{"text":"guaranty was secured by a deed of trust on the personal residence he owned with his","paragraph_id":"para_60"},{"text":"FILED","paragraph_id":"para_61"},{"text":"OCTOBER 14, 2025","paragraph_id":"para_62"},{"text":"In the Office of the Clerk of Court","paragraph_id":"para_63"},{"text":"WA State Court of Appeals, Division IIIFor the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.","paragraph_id":"para_64"},{"text":"No. 40591-5-III","paragraph_id":"para_65"},{"text":"Clausen, et al. v. WBL Spo I, LLC, et al.","paragraph_id":"para_66"},{"text":"2","paragraph_id":"para_67"},{"text":"wife. After Lilac City defaulted, WBL initiated a nonjudicial foreclosure on the","paragraph_id":"para_68","court_paragraph":2},{"text":"residence. In response, Clausen and Lilac City filed suit against WBL, asserting claims","paragraph_id":"para_69"},{"text":"under the CLA, the Consumer Protection Act (CPA), chapter 19.86 RCW, and","paragraph_id":"para_70"},{"text":"Washington’s usury statutes. On summary judgment the superior court dismissed","paragraph_id":"para_71"},{"text":"Clausen’s claims, holding that the CLA did not apply because Clausen was not a","paragraph_id":"para_72"},{"text":"“borrower” under the CLA.","paragraph_id":"para_73"},{"text":"We affirm. The plain language and legislative intent of the CLA support the trial","paragraph_id":"para_74"},{"text":"court’s conclusion that Clausen was not a borrower and therefore the CLA licensing","paragraph_id":"para_75"},{"text":"requirements did not apply to WBL’s loan. Accordingly, Clausen’s usury and CPA","paragraph_id":"para_76"},{"text":"claims, which are premised on his alleged CLA violations, likewise fail.","paragraph_id":"para_77"},{"text":"BACKGROUND","paragraph_id":"para_78"},{"text":"Because this case was resolved on summary judgment, we consider the evidence","paragraph_id":"para_79"},{"text":"in a light most favorable to Clausen as the nonmoving party. Jonathan and Jodi Clausen","paragraph_id":"para_80"},{"text":"own property located on Norman Road in Spokane, Washington, which they have used as","paragraph_id":"para_81"},{"text":"their principal residence. In June 2022, Jonathan Clausen, acting on behalf of his","paragraph_id":"para_82"},{"text":"company, Lilac City LLC, submitted a “Business Financing Application” to Big Think","paragraph_id":"para_83"},{"text":"Capital, an independent loan broker. The application identified Lilac City as the","paragraph_id":"para_84"},{"text":"applicant. The application stated that the loan proceeds would be used for “[t]emporaryFor the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.","paragraph_id":"para_85"},{"text":"No. 40591-5-III","paragraph_id":"para_86"},{"text":"Clausen, et al. v. WBL Spo I, LLC, et al.","paragraph_id":"para_87"},{"text":"3","paragraph_id":"para_88"},{"text":"working capital, equipment and inventory until SBA[1] funds. looking to build.” Clerk’s","paragraph_id":"para_89","court_paragraph":3},{"text":"Papers (CP) at 73. Mr. Clausen indicated on the application that he was the “Primary","paragraph_id":"para_90"},{"text":"Owner” of Lilac City and listed an address on Hogan Street in Spokane for the business.","paragraph_id":"para_91"},{"text":"He signed below a paragraph acknowledging that Lilac City authorized Big Think Capital","paragraph_id":"para_92"},{"text":"to acquire a commercial loan.","paragraph_id":"para_93"},{"text":"Big Think Capital referred Lilac City to WBL, which agreed to loan Lilac City","paragraph_id":"para_94"},{"text":"$400,000, plus interest. As part of the transaction, Lilac City executed a “Business","paragraph_id":"para_95"},{"text":"Promissory Note and Security Agreement” (the Note), with Clausen signing as the chief","paragraph_id":"para_96"},{"text":"executive officer (CEO). The note expressly refers to Lilac City as the borrower and","paragraph_id":"para_97"},{"text":"states that the loan proceeds would be used exclusively for business purposes. In","paragraph_id":"para_98"},{"text":"connection with the loan, Mr. Clausen also signed a “Business Loan Purpose Affidavit”","paragraph_id":"para_99"},{"text":"affirming that the funds would not be used for personal, consumer, or household","paragraph_id":"para_100"},{"text":"purposes. The parties also executed an agreement authorizing direct deposit of funds into","paragraph_id":"para_101"},{"text":"an account held in the name of Lilac City.","paragraph_id":"para_102"},{"text":"To secure the loan obligations of Lilac City, Clausen signed a “Continuing","paragraph_id":"para_103"},{"text":"Guaranty Personal (Unlimited)” the (Guaranty) in his individual capacity, and not in his","paragraph_id":"para_104"},{"text":"capacity as CEO of Lilac City. To secure the payment obligations under the Guaranty,","paragraph_id":"para_105"},{"text":"Clausen and his wife signed a “Deed of Trust, Assignment of Leases and Rents and","paragraph_id":"para_106"},{"text":"1 Small Business Administration.For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.","paragraph_id":"para_107"},{"text":"No. 40591-5-III","paragraph_id":"para_108"},{"text":"Clausen, et al. v. WBL Spo I, LLC, et al.","paragraph_id":"para_109"},{"text":"4","paragraph_id":"para_110"},{"text":"Security Agreement” the “Deed of Trust” dated August 9, 2022, granting WBL a security","paragraph_id":"para_111","court_paragraph":4},{"text":"interest in their Norman Road residence. The recitals to the Deed of Trust reiterate the","paragraph_id":"para_112"},{"text":"loan structure: Lilac City was the “‘borrower,’” and the Clausens, as “Trustor[s],” were","paragraph_id":"para_113"},{"text":"signing the Deed of Trust to guarantee the loan to Lilac City.","paragraph_id":"para_114"},{"text":"WBL then partially funded the loan in August 2022, by paying off Lilac City’s","paragraph_id":"para_115"},{"text":"preexisting business debts. WBL and Lilac City also executed two “Holdback”","paragraph_id":"para_116"},{"text":"agreements. WBL ultimately applied the Holdback funds to loan payments after Lilac","paragraph_id":"para_117"},{"text":"City defaulted. Following Lilac City’s default, WBL initiated nonjudicial foreclosure","paragraph_id":"para_118"},{"text":"proceedings on the Clausens’ Norman Road residence.","paragraph_id":"para_119"},{"text":"In February 2024, Mr. Clausen and Lilac City filed a complaint in Spokane","paragraph_id":"para_120"},{"text":"County Superior Court against WBL asserting violations of the CLA, Washington’s","paragraph_id":"para_121"},{"text":"usury statute,2 and the CPA. They concurrently moved for a temporary restraining order","paragraph_id":"para_122"},{"text":"and preliminary injunction to stop the trustee’s sale of their Norman Road residence. The","paragraph_id":"para_123"},{"text":"court granted a preliminary injunction, restraining the sale pending the outcome of the","paragraph_id":"para_124"},{"text":"case.","paragraph_id":"para_125"},{"text":"WBL subsequently moved to dismiss the case under CR 12(b) and CR 56. The","paragraph_id":"para_126"},{"text":"court issued a written decision granting WBL’s motion, dismissing the complaint.","paragraph_id":"para_127"},{"text":"Clausen and Lilac City appeal.","paragraph_id":"para_128"},{"text":"2 RCW 19.52.020.For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.","paragraph_id":"para_129"},{"text":"No. 40591-5-III","paragraph_id":"para_130"},{"text":"Clausen, et al. v. WBL Spo I, LLC, et al.","paragraph_id":"para_131"},{"text":"5","paragraph_id":"para_132"},{"text":"ANALYSIS","paragraph_id":"para_133","court_paragraph":5},{"text":"1. CONSUMER LOAN ACT","paragraph_id":"para_134"},{"text":"Clausen argues that the trial court erred by concluding he and his spouse were not","paragraph_id":"para_135"},{"text":"“borrowers” under former RCW 31.04.025(2)(e) (2023),3 and that the CLA licensing","paragraph_id":"para_136"},{"text":"requirements did not apply to WBL. He contends that the CLA’s broad definition of","paragraph_id":"para_137"},{"text":"“borrower” includes any individual who seeks information about a loan and pledges liens","paragraph_id":"para_138"},{"text":"against their primary dwellings, even when the loan is made to a separate business entity","paragraph_id":"para_139"},{"text":"for business purposes. He further asserts that WBL’s conduct triggered the CLA’s","paragraph_id":"para_140"},{"text":"protections, and that the trial court’s interpretation undermines the legislature’s stated","paragraph_id":"para_141"},{"text":"goal of protecting Washington homeowners. We disagree and affirm the trial court’s","paragraph_id":"para_142"},{"text":"dismissal of Clausen’s claims on summary judgment.","paragraph_id":"para_143"},{"text":"Our review of the trial court’s order on summary judgment is de novo. Hisle v.","paragraph_id":"para_144"},{"text":"Todd Pac. Shipyards Corp., 151 Wn.2d 853, 860, 93 P.3d 108 (2004). When reviewing","paragraph_id":"para_145"},{"text":"an order granting summary judgment, we engage in the same inquiry as the trial court,","paragraph_id":"para_146"},{"text":"considering all facts and reasonable inferences in the light most favorable to the","paragraph_id":"para_147"},{"text":"nonmoving party. Kahn v. Salerno, 90 Wn. App. 110, 117, 951 P.2d 321 (1998).","paragraph_id":"para_148"},{"text":"3 While this case was pending, the legislature amended RCW 31.04.025, effective","paragraph_id":"para_149"},{"text":"June 6, 2024. LAWS OF 2024, ch. 249, § 2. The amendments apply prospectively. LAWS","paragraph_id":"para_150"},{"text":"OF 2024, ch. 249, § 5. Although the substance of the relevant provision did not change,","paragraph_id":"para_151"},{"text":"its subsection designation did. Compare RCW 31.04.025(4)(e), with former RCW","paragraph_id":"para_152"},{"text":"31.04.025(2)(e). This opinion refers to the former version of the statute, which was in","paragraph_id":"para_153"},{"text":"effect at the time of the underlying transaction and proceedings.For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.","paragraph_id":"para_154"},{"text":"No. 40591-5-III","paragraph_id":"para_155"},{"text":"Clausen, et al. v. WBL Spo I, LLC, et al.","paragraph_id":"para_156"},{"text":"6","paragraph_id":"para_157"},{"text":"Summary judgment is proper if “there is no genuine issue” of “material fact and that the","paragraph_id":"para_158"},{"text":"moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law.” CR 56(c). We may affirm a","paragraph_id":"para_159"},{"text":"trial court’s disposition of a summary judgment motion on any basis supported by the","paragraph_id":"para_160"},{"text":"record. Redding v. Virginia Mason Med. Ctr., 75 Wn. App. 424, 426, 878 P.2d 483","paragraph_id":"para_161"},{"text":"(1994).","paragraph_id":"para_162"},{"text":"We also review questions of statutory interpretation de novo. Jametsky v. Olsen,","paragraph_id":"para_163"},{"text":"179 Wn.2d 756, 761, 317 P.3d 1003 (2014). The primary goal of statutory interpretation","paragraph_id":"para_164"},{"text":"is to determine and give effect to the legislature’s intent. Gray v. Suttell & Assocs., 181","paragraph_id":"para_165"},{"text":"Wn.2d 329, 339, 334 P.3d 14 (2014). To determine legislative intent, we look at the","paragraph_id":"para_166"},{"text":"plain language of the statute, consider the text of the provision, the context of the statute,","paragraph_id":"para_167"},{"text":"any related statutory provisions, and the statutory scheme as a whole. Id. “ʻWhenever","paragraph_id":"para_168"},{"text":"possible, statutes are to be construed so no clause, sentence or word shall be superfluous,","paragraph_id":"para_169"},{"text":"void, or insignificant.’” Porter v. Kirkendoll, 194 Wn.2d 194, 211, 449 P.3d 627 (2019)","paragraph_id":"para_170"},{"text":"(internal quotation marks omitted) (quoting HomeStreet, Inc. v. Dep’t of Revenue, 166","paragraph_id":"para_171"},{"text":"Wn.2d 444, 452, 210 P.3d 297 (2009)). We must apply the statute as written, “we cannot","paragraph_id":"para_172"},{"text":"rewrite plain statutory language under the guise of construction.” McColl v. Anderson, 6","paragraph_id":"para_173"},{"text":"Wn. App. 2d 88, 91, 429 P.3d 1113 (2018). If the plain meaning of the statute is","paragraph_id":"para_174"},{"text":"unambiguous, we apply that meaning. Ronald Wastewater Dist. v. Olympic View Water","paragraph_id":"para_175"},{"text":"& Sewer Dist., 196 Wn.2d 353, 364, 474 P.3d 547 (2020).For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.","paragraph_id":"para_176"},{"text":"No. 40591-5-III","paragraph_id":"para_177"},{"text":"Clausen, et al. v. WBL Spo I, LLC, et al.","paragraph_id":"para_178"},{"text":"7","paragraph_id":"para_179"},{"text":"If the plain language of the statute is susceptible “‘to more than one reasonable","paragraph_id":"para_180","court_paragraph":7},{"text":"interpretation,’” then the statute is ambiguous. Jametsky, 179 Wn.2d at 762 (quoting","paragraph_id":"para_181"},{"text":"City of Seattle v. Winebrenner, 167 Wn.2d 451, 456, 219 P.3d 686 (2009)). We resolve","paragraph_id":"para_182"},{"text":"ambiguity by considering outside sources that may indicate legislative intent, including","paragraph_id":"para_183"},{"text":"principles of “ʻstatutory construction, legislative history, and relevant case law.’”","paragraph_id":"para_184"},{"text":"Jametsky, 179 Wn.2d at 761 (quoting Christensen v. Ellsworth, 162 Wn.2d 365, 373, 173","paragraph_id":"para_185"},{"text":"P.3d 228 (2007)). “However, multiple meanings of a word do not necessarily create","paragraph_id":"para_186"},{"text":"ambiguity. All words must be read in the context of the statute in which they appear, not","paragraph_id":"para_187"},{"text":"in isolation or subject to all possible meanings found in a dictionary.” State v. Lilyblad,","paragraph_id":"para_188"},{"text":"163 Wn.2d 1, 9, 177 P.3d 686 (2008).","paragraph_id":"para_189"},{"text":"Chapter 31.04 RCW contains the CLA, which regulates certain loan transactions","paragraph_id":"para_190"},{"text":"for high-risk consumers in Washington. See RCW 31.04.025(1), .015(13). It provides a","paragraph_id":"para_191"},{"text":"mechanism for licensed businesses to provide certain loans with interest rates up to 25","paragraph_id":"para_192"},{"text":"percent. RCW 31.04.105(1).","paragraph_id":"para_193"},{"text":"Not all lenders who provide high-interest loans are subject to the CLA. Relevant","paragraph_id":"para_194"},{"text":"here, former RCW 31.04.025(2)(e) exempts:","paragraph_id":"para_195"},{"text":"Any person making a loan primarily for business, commercial, or","paragraph_id":"para_196"},{"text":"agricultural purposes unless the loan is secured by a lien on the borrower’s","paragraph_id":"para_197"},{"text":"primary dwelling.","paragraph_id":"para_198"},{"text":"(Emphasis added.)","paragraph_id":"para_199"},{"text":"Two key definitions within the CLA frame the analysis in this case:For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.","paragraph_id":"para_200"},{"text":"No. 40591-5-III","paragraph_id":"para_201"},{"text":"Clausen, et al. v. WBL Spo I, LLC, et al.","paragraph_id":"para_202"},{"text":"8","paragraph_id":"para_203"},{"text":"• “Borrower” means any person who consults with or retains a licensee","paragraph_id":"para_204","court_paragraph":8},{"text":"or person subject to this chapter in an effort to obtain, or who seeks","paragraph_id":"para_205"},{"text":"information about obtaining a loan, regardless of whether that person","paragraph_id":"para_206"},{"text":"actually obtains such a loan. RCW 31.04.015(4) (emphasis added).","paragraph_id":"para_207"},{"text":"• “Person” includes individuals, partnerships, associations, limited","paragraph_id":"para_208"},{"text":"liability companies, limited liability partnerships, trusts, corporations,","paragraph_id":"para_209"},{"text":"and all other legal entities. RCW 31.04.015(21) (emphasis added).","paragraph_id":"para_210"},{"text":"The trial court correctly determined that WBL was not subject to licensing","paragraph_id":"para_211"},{"text":"requirements under the CLA, because Lilac City—not Clausen or his wife—was the","paragraph_id":"para_212"},{"text":"borrower, and the loan was not secured by the borrower’s primary dwelling.","paragraph_id":"para_213"},{"text":"It is undisputed that Lilac City was the named borrower on the loan and deed of","paragraph_id":"para_214"},{"text":"trust and that the loan was made for business purposes. An LLC such as Lilac City","paragraph_id":"para_215"},{"text":"qualifies as a “person” under RCW 31.04.015(21), which includes both individuals and","paragraph_id":"para_216"},{"text":"business entities. Under former RCW 31.04.025(2)(e), loans made primarily for business","paragraph_id":"para_217"},{"text":"purposes are exempt from CLA licensing requirements unless they are secured by a lien","paragraph_id":"para_218"},{"text":"on the borrower’s primary dwelling.","paragraph_id":"para_219"},{"text":"Two key factors support the conclusion that WBL is exempt from the CLA’s","paragraph_id":"para_220"},{"text":"licensing requirements. First, while the loan was secured by a lien on the Clausens’","paragraph_id":"para_221"},{"text":"personal residence, there is no evidence that the residence was owned or occupied by","paragraph_id":"para_222"},{"text":"Lilac City. Thus, the borrower—Lilac City—did not pledge its own primary dwelling as","paragraph_id":"para_223"},{"text":"collateral.For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.","paragraph_id":"para_224"},{"text":"No. 40591-5-III","paragraph_id":"para_225"},{"text":"Clausen, et al. v. WBL Spo I, LLC, et al.","paragraph_id":"para_226"},{"text":"9","paragraph_id":"para_227"},{"text":"Second, the Deed of Trust to the Clausens’ primary residence did not “secure” the","paragraph_id":"para_228","court_paragraph":9},{"text":"loan itself, but rather secured Clausen’s personal Guaranty. The Deed of Trust","paragraph_id":"para_229"},{"text":"specifically identified Lilac City as the borrower and the Clausens as guarantors.","paragraph_id":"para_230"},{"text":"Because Clausen, not Lilac City, provided the personal Guaranty, the Deed of Trust","paragraph_id":"para_231"},{"text":"served as collateral for that Guaranty, not for the loan made to Lilac City. This","paragraph_id":"para_232"},{"text":"distinction further supports the conclusion that the exemption in former RCW","paragraph_id":"para_233"},{"text":"31.04.025(2)(e) applies to WBL.","paragraph_id":"para_234"},{"text":"Clausen argues that he and his wife should be treated as “borrowers” under RCW","paragraph_id":"para_235"},{"text":"31.04.015(4), which defines “borrower” as “any person who consults with or retains a","paragraph_id":"para_236"},{"text":"licensee or person subject to this chapter in an effort to obtain, or who seeks information","paragraph_id":"para_237"},{"text":"about obtaining a loan.” He contends that because he consulted with WBL and","paragraph_id":"para_238"},{"text":"guaranteed the loan, he and his wife individually meet this definition. See Appellant’s","paragraph_id":"para_239"},{"text":"Br. at 14. But this interpretation stretches the statutory language beyond its plain","paragraph_id":"para_240"},{"text":"meaning. Clausen’s interpretation seems to read undue ambiguity into the terms “any","paragraph_id":"para_241"},{"text":"person” and “individual.”","paragraph_id":"para_242"},{"text":"While the definition of “person” under RCW 31.04.015(21) includes both","paragraph_id":"para_243"},{"text":"individuals and limited liability companies, it does not suggest that agents or guarantors","paragraph_id":"para_244"},{"text":"acting on behalf of an entity automatically become “borrowers” in their own right.","paragraph_id":"para_245"},{"text":"Moreover, the clause “regardless of whether that person actually obtains such a loan” in","paragraph_id":"para_246"},{"text":"RCW 31.04.015(4) must be read in context: it extends borrower status to individuals whoFor the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.","paragraph_id":"para_247"},{"text":"No. 40591-5-III","paragraph_id":"para_248"},{"text":"Clausen, et al. v. WBL Spo I, LLC, et al.","paragraph_id":"para_249"},{"text":"10","paragraph_id":"para_250"},{"text":"apply for or seek information about a loan even if they are not ultimately approved.","paragraph_id":"para_251","court_paragraph":10},{"text":"Accepting Clausen’s definition would turn every agent acting on behalf of a separate","paragraph_id":"para_252"},{"text":"business entity into a borrower.4","paragraph_id":"para_253"},{"text":"Clausen also contends that reading the definition of “borrower” to exclude persons","paragraph_id":"para_254"},{"text":"who pursue business loans on behalf of a legal entity renders the statutory language","paragraph_id":"para_255"},{"text":"superfluous because a business entity cannot have a “primary dwelling.” While this may","paragraph_id":"para_256"},{"text":"be true, the statutory language has meaning and relevance in situations where a borrower","paragraph_id":"para_257"},{"text":"is doing business without creating a separate entity.","paragraph_id":"para_258"},{"text":"4 Because the statute is unambiguous, it is unnecessary to resort to statutory","paragraph_id":"para_259"},{"text":"construction, legislative history, or case law to interpret the term “borrower.” See","paragraph_id":"para_260"},{"text":"Jametsky, 179 Wn.2d at 761-62. Nonetheless, this interpretation is consistent with well-","paragraph_id":"para_261"},{"text":"established agency principles:","paragraph_id":"para_262"},{"text":"“An agent who enters into a contract on behalf of a disclosed principal does","paragraph_id":"para_263"},{"text":"not become a party to the contract and is not subject to liability as a","paragraph_id":"para_264"},{"text":"guarantor of the principal’s performance unless the agent and the third party","paragraph_id":"para_265"},{"text":"so agree. Thus, in the absence of such agreement, an agent for a disclosed","paragraph_id":"para_266"},{"text":"principal who enters into a contract on the principal’s behalf is not subject","paragraph_id":"para_267"},{"text":"to liability if the principal fails to perform obligations created by the","paragraph_id":"para_268"},{"text":"contract.”","paragraph_id":"para_269"},{"text":"United Fin. Cas. Co. v. Coleman, 173 Wn. App. 463, 475 n.5, 295 P.3d 763 (2012)","paragraph_id":"para_270"},{"text":"(quoting RESTATEMENT (THIRD) OF AGENCY § 6.01, cmt. b (A. L. I. 2006)).","paragraph_id":"para_271"},{"text":"Further, as the trial court correctly reasoned, under Washington law a debtor-entity","paragraph_id":"para_272"},{"text":"and guarantor cannot be one and the same. Wilson Ct. Ltd. P’ship v. Tony Maroni’s, Inc.,","paragraph_id":"para_273"},{"text":"134 Wn.2d 692, 707, 952 P.2d 590 (1998) (“ʻThe debtor is not a party to the guaranty,","paragraph_id":"para_274"},{"text":"and the guarantor is not a party to the principal obligation.’”) (quoting Robey v. Walton","paragraph_id":"para_275"},{"text":"Lumber Co., 17 Wn.2d 242, 255, 135 P.2d 95 (1943)); CP at 628.For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.","paragraph_id":"para_276"},{"text":"No. 40591-5-III","paragraph_id":"para_277"},{"text":"Clausen, et al. v. WBL Spo I, LLC, et al.","paragraph_id":"para_278"},{"text":"11","paragraph_id":"para_279"},{"text":"Next, Clausen’s reliance on an email from DFI5 is also unavailing. Both in the","paragraph_id":"para_280","court_paragraph":11},{"text":"trial court and on appeal, Clausen cited two exhibits containing emails exchanged","paragraph_id":"para_281"},{"text":"between his counsel and JJ Choi, Chief of Regulatory Affairs for DFI’s Division of","paragraph_id":"para_282"},{"text":"Consumer Services. In response to questions by Clausen’s attorney, Choi suggested that","paragraph_id":"para_283"},{"text":"the CLA would apply under similar circumstances. However, the email was not made","paragraph_id":"para_284"},{"text":"under oath and contained disclaimers that it was not intended as legal advice or a formal","paragraph_id":"para_285"},{"text":"opinion from DFI. WBL moved to strike the emails, arguing that they constituted","paragraph_id":"para_286"},{"text":"inadmissible hearsay and legal conclusions, and did not constitute a formal agency","paragraph_id":"para_287"},{"text":"interpretation. The trial court ultimately denied WBL’s motion to strike, explaining that","paragraph_id":"para_288"},{"text":"it would not give the emails “a lot of weight.” See Rep. of Proc. (RP) at 42.","paragraph_id":"para_289"},{"text":"We give no deference to the informal email. It is not legal advice or DFI’s","paragraph_id":"para_290"},{"text":"position. DFI did not submit a brief or a declaration in this case and there is no indication","paragraph_id":"para_291"},{"text":"that DFI had all the information before it.","paragraph_id":"para_292"},{"text":"Clausen also invokes public policy considerations, arguing that the CLA should","paragraph_id":"para_293"},{"text":"apply in this case because excluding individuals like himself from the definition of","paragraph_id":"para_294"},{"text":"“borrower” frustrates the CLA’s goals of protecting consumers and their primary","paragraph_id":"para_295"},{"text":"dwellings. In support, he cites the legislative findings and declarations in RCW","paragraph_id":"para_296"},{"text":"31.04.015, which emphasizes the importance of responsible lending, access to credit, and","paragraph_id":"para_297"},{"text":"5 The Department of Financial Institutions and its director are charged with","paragraph_id":"para_298"},{"text":"administering and enforcing the CLA. See RCW 31.04.015(5), .093, .205.For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.","paragraph_id":"para_299"},{"text":"No. 40591-5-III","paragraph_id":"para_300"},{"text":"Clausen, et al. v. WBL Spo I, LLC, et al.","paragraph_id":"para_301"},{"text":"12","paragraph_id":"para_302"},{"text":"protections for borrowers in the residential real estate market. But while these policy","paragraph_id":"para_303","court_paragraph":12},{"text":"objectives are important, they cannot override unambiguous statutory language. As this","paragraph_id":"para_304"},{"text":"court has made clear, “compelling as [public policy arguments] may be, we are not free","paragraph_id":"para_305"},{"text":"to create public policy under the guise of interpreting a statute. That is a legislative","paragraph_id":"para_306"},{"text":"matter.” Graham v. Notti, 147 Wn. App. 629, 640, 196 P.3d 1070 (2008).","paragraph_id":"para_307"},{"text":"Finally, Clausen argues in his reply brief that accepting WBL’s interpretation","paragraph_id":"para_308"},{"text":"would improperly treat the term “borrower” as singular, contrary to RCW 1.12.050,","paragraph_id":"para_309"},{"text":"which provides that statutory terms may be construed as plural unless the context clearly","paragraph_id":"para_310"},{"text":"indicates otherwise. But that principle does not support his position. The issue in this","paragraph_id":"para_311"},{"text":"case is not whether the statutory term “borrower” includes more than one borrower.","paragraph_id":"para_312"},{"text":"Rather, the issue is whether Clausen acted in his individual capacity when seeking the","paragraph_id":"para_313"},{"text":"loan. He did not. The undisputed evidence shows that Clausen sought the loan on behalf","paragraph_id":"para_314"},{"text":"of Lilac City, the named borrower.","paragraph_id":"para_315"},{"text":"The trial court properly concluded that Clausen and his wife were not “borrowers”","paragraph_id":"para_316"},{"text":"under the CLA. Accordingly, the licensing exemption in former RCW 31.04.025(2)(e)","paragraph_id":"para_317"},{"text":"applies to WBL and the trial court properly dismissed Clausen’s CLA claim.","paragraph_id":"para_318"},{"text":"2. USURY AND CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT CLAIMS","paragraph_id":"para_319"},{"text":"Clausen contends the trial court erred by dismissing his claims under the CPA and","paragraph_id":"para_320"},{"text":"Washington’s usury statutes. He argues that WBL charged an annual interest rate of","paragraph_id":"para_321"},{"text":"28.61 percent, in violation of RCW 31.04.105(1), which caps interest at 25 percent forFor the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.","paragraph_id":"para_322"},{"text":"No. 40591-5-III","paragraph_id":"para_323"},{"text":"Clausen, et al. v. WBL Spo I, LLC, et al.","paragraph_id":"para_324"},{"text":"13","paragraph_id":"para_325"},{"text":"CLA licensees, and RCW 19.52.020, which caps general interest rates at 12 percent.","paragraph_id":"para_326","court_paragraph":13},{"text":"Clausen asserts that because WBL was not licensed under the CLA, it was not entitled to","paragraph_id":"para_327"},{"text":"charge a rate above the general usury cap. He further claims that WBL’s alleged CLA","paragraph_id":"para_328"},{"text":"violations—including charging excessive interest and taking a lien against his primary","paragraph_id":"para_329"},{"text":"dwelling without being licensed—also constitute unfair and deceptive practices under the","paragraph_id":"para_330"},{"text":"CPA.","paragraph_id":"para_331"},{"text":"WBL responds that Clausen’s claims fail because the loan was a business-purpose","paragraph_id":"para_332"},{"text":"transaction made to Lilac City, and is therefore exempt from the usury statute under","paragraph_id":"para_333"},{"text":"RCW 19.52.080. In support of its argument, WBL cites Paulman v. Filtercorp, 127","paragraph_id":"para_334"},{"text":"Wn.2d 387, 899 P.2d 1259 (1995), where the Washington Supreme Court held that","paragraph_id":"para_335"},{"text":"personal guarantees do not transform business loans into consumer loans subject to usury","paragraph_id":"para_336"},{"text":"protections. WBL also argues that Clausen’s CPA claim cannot survive because it is","paragraph_id":"para_337"},{"text":"entirely derivative of his CLA and usury claims.","paragraph_id":"para_338"},{"text":"Washington’s usury statute prohibits charging an interest rate that exceeds 12","paragraph_id":"para_339"},{"text":"percent per annum. RCW 19.52.020. However, RCW 19.52.080 prevents certain","paragraph_id":"para_340"},{"text":"business entities or persons involved in business loan transactions from pleading the","paragraph_id":"para_341"},{"text":"defense of usury:","paragraph_id":"para_342"},{"text":"Profit and nonprofit corporations, Massachusetts trusts, associations,","paragraph_id":"para_343"},{"text":"trusts, general partnerships, joint ventures, limited partnerships, and","paragraph_id":"para_344"},{"text":"governments and governmental subdivisions, agencies, or instrumentalities","paragraph_id":"para_345"},{"text":"may not plead the defense of usury nor maintain any action thereon or","paragraph_id":"para_346"},{"text":"therefor, and persons may not plead the defense of usury nor maintain anyFor the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.","paragraph_id":"para_347"},{"text":"No. 40591-5-III","paragraph_id":"para_348"},{"text":"Clausen, et al. v. WBL Spo I, LLC, et al.","paragraph_id":"para_349"},{"text":"14","paragraph_id":"para_350"},{"text":"action thereon or therefor if the transaction was primarily for agricultural,","paragraph_id":"para_351","court_paragraph":14},{"text":"commercial, investment, or business purposes: PROVIDED, HOWEVER,","paragraph_id":"para_352"},{"text":"That this section shall not apply to a consumer transaction of any amount.","paragraph_id":"para_353"},{"text":"Consumer transactions, as used in this section, shall mean","paragraph_id":"para_354"},{"text":"transactions primarily for personal, family, or household purposes.","paragraph_id":"para_355"},{"text":"RCW 19.52.080.","paragraph_id":"para_356"},{"text":"In Paulman, when interpreting the provision above, the Washington Supreme","paragraph_id":"para_357"},{"text":"Court held that a business loan to a corporation does not lose its character as such merely","paragraph_id":"para_358"},{"text":"because it is guaranteed by an individual person. 127 Wn.2d at 393 (“When a corporate","paragraph_id":"para_359"},{"text":"debtor borrows funds for a business purpose, RCW 19.52.080 applies regardless of","paragraph_id":"para_360"},{"text":"whether the loan is guaranteed by a natural person.”).","paragraph_id":"para_361"},{"text":"“The CPA prohibits ʻ[u]nfair methods of competition and unfair or deceptive acts","paragraph_id":"para_362"},{"text":"or practices in the conduct of any trade or commerce.’” Trujillo v. Nw. Tr. Servs, Inc.,","paragraph_id":"para_363"},{"text":"183 Wn.2d 820, 834, 355 P.3d 1100 (2015) (quoting RCW 19.86.020). To succeed on a","paragraph_id":"para_364"},{"text":"CPA cause of action, the plaintiff must establish the following elements: “(1) unfair or","paragraph_id":"para_365"},{"text":"deceptive act or practice; (2) occurring in trade or commerce; (3) public interest impact;","paragraph_id":"para_366"},{"text":"(4) injury to plaintiff in his or her business or property; (5) causation.” Hangman Ridge","paragraph_id":"para_367"},{"text":"Training Stables, Inc. v. Safeco Title Ins. Co., 105 Wn.2d 778, 780, 719 P.2d 531 (1986);","paragraph_id":"para_368"},{"text":"see also RCW 19.86.090. The first two elements of a CPA claim “may be established by","paragraph_id":"para_369"},{"text":"a showing that the alleged act constitutes a per se unfair trade practice.” Hangman, 105","paragraph_id":"para_370"},{"text":"Wn.2d at 786. “A per se unfair trade practice exists when a statute which has beenFor the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.","paragraph_id":"para_371"},{"text":"No. 40591-5-III","paragraph_id":"para_372"},{"text":"Clausen, et al. v. WBL Spo I, LLC, et al.","paragraph_id":"para_373"},{"text":"15","paragraph_id":"para_374"},{"text":"declared by the Legislature to constitute an unfair or deceptive act in trade or commerce","paragraph_id":"para_375","court_paragraph":15},{"text":"has been violated.” Id. By statute, a violation of the CLA is also a violation of the first","paragraph_id":"para_376"},{"text":"and second elements of the CPA. RCW 31.04.208.","paragraph_id":"para_377"},{"text":"The trial court properly dismissed Clausen’s claims under both the usury statute","paragraph_id":"para_378"},{"text":"and the CPA. Clausen’s claims are premised on the assertion that WBL violated the CLA","paragraph_id":"para_379"},{"text":"by making an unlicensed loan at an excessive interest rate secured by a lien on his","paragraph_id":"para_380"},{"text":"primary dwelling. However, as discussed above, the CLA does not apply to the loan at","paragraph_id":"para_381"},{"text":"issue because the borrower—Lilac City—is a business entity and did not pledge its own","paragraph_id":"para_382"},{"text":"primary dwelling as security. The statutory exemption in former RCW 31.04.025(2)(e)","paragraph_id":"para_383"},{"text":"applies, and therefore WBL was not required to be licensed under the CLA.","paragraph_id":"para_384"},{"text":"Clausen’s usury claim fails for similar reasons. Although the general usury statute","paragraph_id":"para_385"},{"text":"limits interest rates to 12 percent per annum, RCW 19.52.080 precludes both business","paragraph_id":"para_386"},{"text":"entities and “persons” from asserting a usury defense in business loan transactions. This","paragraph_id":"para_387"},{"text":"includes loans made to businesses for business purposes that are secured by personal","paragraph_id":"para_388"},{"text":"guarantees. Paulman, 127 Wn.2d at 392-94. Paulman applies here. Lilac City, a","paragraph_id":"para_389"},{"text":"business entity, was the borrower, and the loan was for business purposes. The personal","paragraph_id":"para_390"},{"text":"guarantee provided by Clausen does not convert the transaction into a consumer loan as a","paragraph_id":"para_391"},{"text":"matter of law.For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.","paragraph_id":"para_392"},{"text":"No. 40591-5-III","paragraph_id":"para_393"},{"text":"Clausen, et al. v. WBL Spo I, LLC, et al.","paragraph_id":"para_394"},{"text":"16","paragraph_id":"para_395"},{"text":"Clausen argues that Paulman is distinguishable because it predated the 2011","paragraph_id":"para_396","court_paragraph":16},{"text":"amendments to the CLA. However, the CLA amendments do not alter the usury analysis","paragraph_id":"para_397"},{"text":"under RCW 19.52.080. The CLA’s licensing and penalty provisions are separate from","paragraph_id":"para_398"},{"text":"the usury statute, and Clausen cites no authority to support his argument that a violation","paragraph_id":"para_399"},{"text":"of the CLA resurrects a usury defense barred by RCW 19.52.080. Moreover, as","paragraph_id":"para_400"},{"text":"discussed, no CLA violation occurred.","paragraph_id":"para_401"},{"text":"Because Clausen’s CPA claim is entirely derivative of his CLA and usury","paragraph_id":"para_402"},{"text":"arguments, it fails as well. RCW 31.04.208 provides that a violation of the CLA","paragraph_id":"para_403"},{"text":"constitutes a per se violation of the first two elements of the CPA, but without a valid","paragraph_id":"para_404"},{"text":"underlying CLA violation, Clausen cannot satisfy the threshold elements of a CPA claim.","paragraph_id":"para_405"},{"text":"Thus, the trial court correctly concluded that Clausen’s complaint ties the alleged unfair","paragraph_id":"para_406"},{"text":"or deceptive conduct directly to WBL’s purported violations of the CLA and usury","paragraph_id":"para_407"},{"text":"statutes.","paragraph_id":"para_408"},{"text":"We conclude that the trial court properly dismissed Clausen’s CPA and usury","paragraph_id":"para_409"},{"text":"statute claims.","paragraph_id":"para_410"},{"text":"3. ATTORNEY FEES","paragraph_id":"para_411"},{"text":"Both parties request attorney fees on appeal. We address each request, in turn.For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.","paragraph_id":"para_412"},{"text":"No. 40591-5-III","paragraph_id":"para_413"},{"text":"Clausen, et al. v. WBL Spo I, LLC, et al.","paragraph_id":"para_414"},{"text":"17","paragraph_id":"para_415"},{"text":"Clausen requests attorney fees under RAP 18.1, the CLA, and the CPA.6","paragraph_id":"para_416","court_paragraph":17},{"text":"However, because we affirm the trial court’s dismissal of Clausen’s CLA and CPA","paragraph_id":"para_417"},{"text":"claims, he is not entitled to an award of fees under either statute.","paragraph_id":"para_418"},{"text":"WBL requests its reasonable attorney fees and costs for this appeal under RAP","paragraph_id":"para_419"},{"text":"18.1 and RCW 4.84.330. Under RCW 4.84.330, where a contract specifically provides","paragraph_id":"para_420"},{"text":"for attorney fees and costs, the “prevailing party” shall be entitled to such fees and costs.","paragraph_id":"para_421"},{"text":"The “prevailing party” is “the party in whose favor final judgment is rendered.” RCW","paragraph_id":"para_422"},{"text":"4.84.330.","paragraph_id":"para_423"},{"text":"The Note, Guaranty, and Deed of Trust each contain attorney fee provisions. The","paragraph_id":"para_424"},{"text":"Note requires Lilac City to pay WBL’s reasonable attorney fees and costs incurred in","paragraph_id":"para_425"},{"text":"enforcing the agreement. The Guaranty obligates Lilac City to pay all costs and attorney","paragraph_id":"para_426"},{"text":"fees incurred in collecting any part of the guaranteed obligations. And under the Deed of","paragraph_id":"para_427"},{"text":"Trust, WBL is entitled to recover all costs and expenses, including attorney fees, incurred","paragraph_id":"para_428"},{"text":"in pursuing its remedies. Because WBL is the prevailing party on appeal, it is entitled to","paragraph_id":"para_429"},{"text":"an award of its reasonable attorney fees and costs incurred in responding to this appeal.","paragraph_id":"para_430"},{"text":"6 In reply, Clausen seems to also request prevailing party attorney fees under the","paragraph_id":"para_431"},{"text":"loan documents. This request fails for three reasons. First, Clausen did not request","paragraph_id":"para_432"},{"text":"attorney fees on this basis in his opening brief. He was required to make this request in","paragraph_id":"para_433"},{"text":"his opening brief, which he did not do. See RAP 18.1(b). Second, arguments raised in a","paragraph_id":"para_434"},{"text":"reply brief are too late to warrant consideration. In re Marriage of Sacco, 114 Wn.2d 1,","paragraph_id":"para_435"},{"text":"5, 784 P.2d 1266 (1990). Third, because Clausen is not the prevailing party on appeal, he","paragraph_id":"para_436"},{"text":"is not entitled to attorney fees under the provisions in the loan documents.For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.","paragraph_id":"para_437"},{"text":"No. 40591-5-III","paragraph_id":"para_438"},{"text":"Clausen, et al. v. WBL Spo I, LLC, et al.","paragraph_id":"para_439"},{"text":"18","paragraph_id":"para_440"},{"text":"Clausen is not entitled to an award of attorney fees.","paragraph_id":"para_441","court_paragraph":18},{"text":"Affirmed.","paragraph_id":"para_442"},{"text":"_________________________________","paragraph_id":"para_443"},{"text":"Staab, A.C.J.","paragraph_id":"para_444"},{"text":"WE CONCUR:","paragraph_id":"para_445"},{"text":"_________________________________","paragraph_id":"para_446"},{"text":"Fearing, J.","paragraph_id":"para_447"},{"text":"_________________________________","paragraph_id":"para_448"},{"text":"Murphy, J.For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.","paragraph_id":"para_449"}],"word_count":4685,"cites":[],"cited_by":[],"sha256":"29a0d7e0034bb1625a8a55b9990547e594f1c2c244eb3eff6f7c7748819e9fd3","source_url":"https://www.courts.wa.gov/opinions/pdf/405915_pub.pdf","fetched_at":"2026-10-10T08:49:51.56+00:00","canonical":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/ai/judgments/us/washctapp-40591-5-2025-10-14","risk_graph":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/risk?id=us:washctapp-40591-5-2025-10-14","relations_graph":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/relations?id=us:washctapp-40591-5-2025-10-14","changes":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/us-praxis/changes","agent":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/us-praxis/agent?id=us:washctapp-40591-5-2025-10-14","verification":{"stored_sha256":"29a0d7e0034bb1625a8a55b9990547e594f1c2c244eb3eff6f7c7748819e9fd3","recomputed_sha256":"29a0d7e0034bb1625a8a55b9990547e594f1c2c244eb3eff6f7c7748819e9fd3","intact":true,"checked_at":"2026-10-18T03:32:19.559Z"}},"hash":"sha256:5a8bc730ad2c5f2dae219ceb9deb6dcdb8c64b5214a14cfb7fda8de1576d4b75","version":"legal-2026-10-18","expires":"2026-10-19T00:00:00.000Z","dependency":{"index_version":"legal-2026-10-18+legal-2026-10-18+2026-10-18T01:46:51","content_hash":"sha256:5a8bc730ad2c5f2dae219ceb9deb6dcdb8c64b5214a14cfb7fda8de1576d4b75","revalidate_after":"2026-10-18T04:32:19.749Z","max_copy_age_seconds":3600,"policy":"revalidate-required; attribution-preferred","changelog":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/dependency","verify":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/verify","stale_copy_invalid":true},"canonical":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=us:washctapp-40591-5-2025-10-14","follow":[{"rel":"risk","href":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/risk?id=us:washctapp-40591-5-2025-10-14"},{"rel":"relations","href":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/relations?id=us:washctapp-40591-5-2025-10-14"},{"rel":"agent","href":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/us-praxis/agent?id=us:washctapp-40591-5-2025-10-14"},{"rel":"obligations","href":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/obligation-chain"},{"rel":"changes","href":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/whats-new?jurisdiction=us"}],"disclaimer":"Source reference with official identifier. Not legal advice and not a compliance decision.","content_notice":{"legal_advice":false,"nature":"Source register. Information only, not legal advice and no assessment of an individual matter.","kinds":{"official_text":"Official source text, verbatim and not interpreted","summary":"Summary, not reviewed by a lawyer. Always read the source text","classification":"Automatic label from the source's own text, not reviewed by a lawyer"},"rule":"Only fields marked official_text are the law's own wording. Everything else points to it.","report_error":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/corrections","ai_act_declaration":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/ai-act-declaration"},"usageInfo":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/citering","access_class":"public","access_view":"public","citation":{"citation_url":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/us/praxis/washctapp-40591-5-2025-10-14","cite_as":"NovaCopilot (legal.exploreworldai.com)","provenance":{"publisher":"NovaCopilot","signature":"nc-0399ff1b3e59e7279a92d0c0867e2729","response_hash":"sha256:5a8bc730ad2c5f2dae219ceb9deb6dcdb8c64b5214a14cfb7fda8de1576d4b75"}},"freshness":{"freshness_class":"live","as_of":"2026-11-03T11:05:20.696Z","valid_for":3600,"recheck":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=us%3Awashctapp-40591-5-2025-10-14&verify=1","note":"Kontrollera mot recheck efter valid_for sekunder. If-None-Match ger 304 när inget ändrats.","tokens":19372}}