PABLO v. TULALIP HOUSING AUTHORITY

6 NICS App. 142, PABLO v. TULALIP HOUSING AUTHORITY (June 2004)

IN THE TULALIP TRIBAL COURT OF APPEALS

TULALIP INDIAN RESERVATION

TULALIP, WASHINGTON

Dan Pablo, Appellant,

Tulalip Housing Authority, Appellee.

TUL-Cv-GC-2004-0105 (June 24, 2004)

SYLLABUS^*

Trial court issued order of default following defendant’s failure to appear at hearing on the merits. Court of Appeals holds that notice of the hearing was properly posted and served in accord with tribal code and no error of law or procedure occurred or was even alleged. Trial court order affirmed.

Before: Jane Smith, Chief Justice.

OPINION

This matter came before the Court of Appeals pursuant to a Notice of Appeal being filed by Appellant on May 6, 2004. Appellant is appealing a final judgment issued by the Trial Court on May 5, 2004. The appeal has been timely filed,

Appellant is specifically appealing the Unlawful Detainer issued by the Trial Court. Upon review of the case, the Court of Appeals finds that the Trial Court correctly applied the law concerning service of the documents filed in this case. Appellant was given adequate notice of the pending case and subsequent hearing. He failed to appear for the hearing and the Court correctly ordered issuance of the Order of Default. The Complaint and Notice were both posted at the home and a copy mailed to Appellant at the correct address. Appellant failed to tell the Court of Appeals where the Trial Court erred in interpreting and/or applying the law. Simply disagreeing with the decision of the Trial Court is not adequate grounds for appeal. Appellant must have a valid basis for filing an Appeal. The Court must defer to the decisions of the Trial Court unless there is an obvious violation by the Trial Court in interpreting and applying the law. In the instant case, no such violation or error by the Trial Court can be found.

It is therefore ORDERED that the Appeal is hereby dismissed and this matter remanded to the Trial Court for processing consistent with this Order.

The syllabus is not a part of the Court's Opinion. The syllabus is a summary of the Opinion prepared by the publishers of this Reporter only for the convenience of the reader. Therefore, the syllabus should not be cited in whole or part as legal authority. Only the Opinion, which follows the syllabus, may be cited as legal authority.