## Facts

- William Entel signed a written residential apartment lease expiring in August 1988 that restricted occupancy to signatory tenants.
- In June 1988, Entel married Shannon Snyder-Entel, who moved into the apartment and lived there as her home.
- During the marriage, Shannon commonly paid rent from a joint account and communicated with the manager about maintenance issues.
- In early August 1988, the manager served three pay-or-vacate notices addressed to William; the third included a one-year lease extension form stating all other terms remained the same.
- William signed and returned the lease extension; Shannon did not sign, but knew the landlord intended to terminate absent an extension and believed the lease had been extended.
- The couple remained in the apartment until October 1988, when Shannon sent notice that they would vacate by month’s end.
- The manager later issued a closing statement charging William for rent through the lease term and related items; the claimed debt was assigned to Sunkidd Venture, Inc., doing business as American Bonded Collections.
- After the couple divorced, Sunkidd sued Shannon individually to collect the claimed unpaid rent and charges.

## Issues

1. Whether a wife who did not sign a residential lease extension is separately liable for rent and related charges incurred during the marriage.
2. Whether the lease extension obligation was a community debt and a “family expense” enforceable against either spouse’s separate property.
3. Whether lease terms limiting “tenants” to signatories prevent creditor recovery from a non-signing spouse under Washington community property law.

## Decision

- The Court of Appeals reversed the superior court’s affirmance of the district court’s dismissal and remanded.
- The court held the lease extension executed during the marriage for the couple’s residence was a community obligation.
- The court held rent for family housing is a family expense, permitting enforcement against the separate property of either spouse.
- The court rejected the view that Shannon’s nonsignature, or the lease’s signatory-occupancy clause, categorically barred liability under the community debt and family expense rules.

## Legal Principles

- A debt incurred during marriage is presumed to be a community debt, enforceable against community property unless rebutted.
- Housing rent incurred to provide a marital residence is a “family expense” for which either spouse may be held liable, including via that spouse’s separate property.
- A creditor may pursue either spouse for a community/family-expense obligation even if only one spouse signed the underlying agreement.
- Contractual provisions defining “tenants” or restricting occupancy do not control statutory community property and family-expense liability as to third-party creditor claims.

## Conclusion

The court ruled that rent obligations arising from a lease extension signed by one spouse during marriage for the couple’s housing are presumed community debts and qualify as family expenses, allowing the creditor to proceed against the non-signing spouse individually despite lease language limiting tenants to signatories.


Sunkidd Venture, Inc. v. Snyder-Entel, 87 Wn. App. 211, 941 P.2d 16 (Wash. Ct. App. 1997)