IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON
IN AND FOR SKAGIT COUNTY
ELIZABETH E. GALLAGHER, as §
TRUSTEE of the ANN G. FREEZE §
REVOCABLE TRUST, and of the §
RONALD L. FREEZE REVOCABLE §
TRUST §
Plaintiff, §
§
v. § Case No. 22-2006329
§
ERIC FREEZE §
Defendant. §
NOTICE OF DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION
You are hereby notified that on the ____ day of ____________________, 2022, at __________
(am/pm), or as soon thereafter as Defendant can be heard, in Courtroom ___ of the Superior
Court of the State of Washington, in and for Skagit County, Defendant will bring on for hearing
his Motion for Reconsideration for the reasons stated in the attached Motion.
Dated this ____ day of July, 2022.
Respectfully Submitted,
______________________________
Eric Freeze,
Defendant in pro per
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON
IN AND FOR SKAGIT COUNTY
ELIZABETH E. GALLAGHER, as §
TRUSTEE of the ANN G. FREEZE §
REVOCABLE TRUST, and of the §
RONALD L. FREEZE REVOCABLE §
TRUST §
Plaintiff, §
§
v. § Case No. 22-2006329
§
ERIC FREEZE §
Defendant. §
MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION
NOW COMES Eric Freeze, Defendant, and files this Motion for Reconsideration of the Order on
Plaintiff’s Motion for Continuance of Hearing on Defendant’s Motion for Stay (the “Order”),
and hereby avers as follows:
1. CR 59(a) provides in relevant part as follows: “On the motion of the party aggrieved, a
verdict may be vacated and a new trial granted to all or any of the parties, and on all
issues, or on some of the issues when such issues are clearly and fairly separable and
distinct, or any other decision or order may be vacated and reconsideration granted. Such
motion may be granted for any one of the following causes materially affecting the
substantial rights of such parties: (8) Error in law occurring at the trial and objected to at
the time by the party making the application; or (9) That substantial justice has not been
done.”
2. The first paragraph of the second page of the Order states as follows: “NOWE
WHEREFORE IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion for Continuance of
Defendant’s Motion for Stay is granted.”
3. The last paragraph of the Order states as follows: “IT IS HEREBY FURTHER
ORDERED that the Court’s Order granting Plaintiff Summary Judgment is hereby
amended to hereby extend the date by which the Defendant must vacate the Plaintiff’s
property to August 26, 2022.”
4. "'[T]he major grounds that justify reconsideration involve an intervening change of
controlling law, the availability of new evidence, or the need to correct a clear error or
prevent manifest injustice.'” Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribe v. Hodel, 882 F.2d 364, 369 n.5
(9th Cir. 1989) (quoting 18 C. Wright, A. Miller & E. Cooper, Federal Practice and
Procedure § 4478, at 790); see Frederick S. Wyle P.C. v. Texaco, Inc., 764 F.2d 604, 609
(9th Cir. 1985); see also Keene Corp. v. International Fidelity Ins. Co., 561 F. Supp. 656,
665 (N.D. Ill. 1982) (reconsideration available "to correct manifest errors of law or fact
or to present newly discovered evidence"). Such motions are not the proper vehicle for
offering evidence or theories of law that were available to the party at the time of the
initial ruling. Fay Corp. v. Bat Holdings I, Inc., 651 F. Supp. 307, 309 (W.D. Wash.
1987); see Keene Corp., 561 F. Supp. at 665-66.
5. This matter is pending an appeal at the Court of Appeals of the State of Washington. In
the appeal, Defendant disputes this court’s assertion in regard to right of ownership of the
property which is the subject of this suit.
6. Defendant maintains that he has a right to be granted a stay pending the appeal. However,
the above highlighted parts of the Order are an injustice to Defendant as he has been
asked to vacate the premises by August 26, 2022, without being granted a hearing on his
motion for stay of the order that granted Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment.
7. Defendant has a right to the property, that’s why he is appealing at the Court of Appeals
of the State of Washington.
8. The only way to prevent injustice to Defendant is to reconsider the part of the Order
which states as follows: “IT IS HEREBY FURTHER ORDERED that the Court’s Order
granting Plaintiff Summary Judgment is hereby amended to hereby extend the date by
which the Defendant must vacate the Plaintiff’s property to August 26, 2022.”
9. There are avenues available for Defendant to assert his rights over the property, including
the Court of Appeals of the State of Washington and the Washington Supreme Court.
Defendant wishes to be granted an opportunity to exhaust those avenues by a stay of the
order which granted Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment.
10. If the highest court affirms that Plaintiff is the owner of the property, Defendant will
move out on the date provided by that court. For now, it is only just to grant a stay of the
order that granted Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment.
REASONS WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Defendant respectfully requests this
Honorable Court to GRANT this Motion; RECONSIDER the part of the Order which states that
Defendant has to move out on August 26, 2022; and GRANT Defendant such equitable and
further relief as this Court deems necessary and proper in the circumstances.
Dated this ____ day of July, 2022.
Respectfully Submitted,
___________________________________
Eric Freeze,
Defendant in pro per
At Legal writing experts, we would be happy to assist in preparing any legal document you need. We are international lawyers and attorneys with significant experience in legal drafting, Commercial-Corporate practice and consulting. In the last few years, we have successfully undertaken similar assignments for clients from different jurisdictions. If given this opportunity, The LegalPen will be able to prepare the legal document within the shortest time possible. You can send us your quick enquiry ( here )