## Facts

- Sharon Keene sued Ronald Edie for child sexual abuse and sued Edie’s spouse, Judith R. Evans, for negligently permitting the abuse.
- At filing, Keene obtained a prejudgment writ of attachment against a parcel of real property owned as community property by Edie and Evans; Evans’ motions to quash were denied.
- Before trial ended, the court dismissed Keene’s negligence claim against Evans; a jury later returned a $313,000 judgment against Edie alone.
- Edie and Evans obtained an Idaho divorce decree, and Edie executed a quitclaim deed purporting to convey his entire community interest in the attached parcel to Evans; Evans recorded a homestead declaration the day judgment was entered.
- Because Edie’s separate property and community personal property were insufficient to satisfy the judgment, Keene sought execution against Edie’s interest in the community real property; after further failed efforts to quash, the sheriff sold an undivided one-half interest, which Keene purchased by credit bid.
- The Court of Appeals reversed, holding a judgment for a spouse’s separate tort could not be executed against community real property, effectively insulating married tortfeasors whose main asset is community realty.
- In a consolidated case, Angela Scappini similarly obtained a molestation judgment against a husband only and sought execution against community real property; the superior court allowed execution.

## Issues

1. Whether a tort victim with a judgment arising from a tort committed by one spouse in a separate capacity may execute against the tortfeasor spouse’s one-half interest in community real property under Washington law.
2. Whether a prejudgment attachment lien on community real property remains enforceable against the tortfeasor spouse’s interest despite a later divorce-related conveyance to the nondebtor spouse.
3. Whether a homestead declaration recorded after attachment and contemporaneous with judgment can prevent execution on the attached interest.

## Decision

- The Washington Supreme Court held that a tort victim may execute a judgment for a spouse’s separate tort against that spouse’s interest in community real property.
- In Keene, the court reversed the Court of Appeals and reinstated enforcement allowing execution against Edie’s one-half interest.
- In Scappini, the court affirmed the superior court’s order permitting execution against the tortfeasor spouse’s interest in community real property.
- The court treated the prejudgment attachment as fixing the creditor’s lien on the tortfeasor spouse’s interest, not defeated by later divorce conveyances or a later-filed homestead declaration.

## Legal Principles

- Under Washington community-property law, a tort creditor may reach the tortfeasor spouse’s present, undivided one-half interest in community real property for a judgment based on the spouse’s separate tort.
- Community real property is not categorically exempt from execution for a spouse’s separate tort liabilities; protection of the non-tortfeasor spouse is addressed by limiting enforcement to the tortfeasor’s share.
- A prejudgment writ of attachment against community real property establishes lien rights in the attached interest that are not eliminated by subsequent divorce decrees or post-lien conveyances by the debtor spouse.
- Homestead protections do not defeat a prior, valid attachment lien; a later-filed homestead declaration is subordinate to preexisting lien rights.

## Conclusion

The court allowed tort victims to enforce separate-tort judgments against the tortfeasor spouse’s one-half interest in community real property and held that a prior attachment lien and resulting execution are not defeated by later divorce-related transfers or a later-filed homestead declaration.


Keene v. Edie, 935 P.2d 588 (Wash. 1997)