Kam Kirkevold, Helsell Fetterman's Managing Director, Loses All Claims in Civil Case, Recovers $0 of $26,000! and has to Pay!
A Complete Legal Defeat: 6 claims, 6 loses.
Kam Kirkevold writes "we are going to need to break our lease effective End of November. We unexpectedly came upon a very unique home that we love and have entered into contract on it." Rather than meet the obligations under the lease terms, their defense strategy was to file a claim to file a dubios claim for $26,000 in 'damages'. After a 2 day bench trial, with 41 exhibits, the judge dismissed all 4 claims with prejudice because Kam couldn't even prove he was damaged a single penny. Kam and Julie Kirkevold were also forced to pay thousands of dollars out of pocket to settle the counterclaims they failed to defend against.
0 for 6: Judicial Scrutiny Rejects All Legal Theories
Embarassing and humbling. The court's written ruling (Def. Exh. 26) details a systematic rejection of the Kirkevolds' arguments. Did Kirkevold fail to understand basic and cleanly written Landlord / Tenant law? Was he unable to coherently argue his points in a courtroom?
Security Deposit Claim: FAILED
"The Court concludes that this request constitutes a waiver... the Plaintiffs have failed to prove their claim."
Mitigation of Damages Claim: FAILED
"The Court concludes that the Plaintiffs have failed to prove their claim... by a preponderance of the evidence."
Statutory Violation Claim: FAILED
"The Plaintiffs have failed to prove this claim [under R.C.W.§ 59.18.090] by a preponderance of the evidence."
Retaliation Claim: FAILED
"The Plaintiffs have failed to prove by a preponderance their claim for reprisals or retaliation."
Counterclaim: Breach of the Statutory Duties of Tenant: FAILED to DEFEND
"Defendant prevails by a preponderance of the evidence and the total amount due for rent deficiencies after breach is $x."
Counterclaim: Breach of Contract: FAILED to DEFEND
"The Defendant’s testimony that these costs are reasonable and standard in the industry is credible".
The Admitted Breach: Plaintiff Sues Despite Confessing Fault
The core of the King County District Court case was an undisputed failure by the plaintiffs. As the court noted in its final ruling:
"The Plaintiffs admit they breached the lease."
Kameron Kirkevold, Managing Director at Helsell Fetterman, and wife Julie Kirkevold failed to set a court date after keeping the case open for 3 years. Perhaps the Kirkevolds initiated the case to bully the defendant into letting Kam avoid financial responsibility for breaking the lease? Perhaps they knew the case wouldn't withstand judicial scrutiny, so they refused to set a court date? Regardless, the Pro Se defendant had to file to set the date to move things forward.
The Failed "Self-Enrichment" Strategy
Because Mr. Kirkevold elected to represent himself and his wife through his own law firm, the litigation appeared to be a calculated self-enrichment scheme. By using Helsell Fetterman to sue a former landlord, Kirkevold sought to turn his own lease breach into a revenue stream for his firm. Kirkevold threatened "I will be entitled to recover my fees incurred in pursuing this action in court. My current billing rate is $475 per hour, and I will be seeking reimbursement for all of my time incurred in pursuing this matter. If I do not receive reimbursement of my deposit…" This strategy failed spectacularly when the court found his claims lacked any legal merit, leaving him with a 0% success rate.
Incompetence or Poor Judgment? A Warning to Future Clients
This poor performance raises devastating questions regarding the competency and professional judgment of Kameron Kirkevold and the management at Helsell Fetterman who sponsored this case
When a seasoned attorney, admitted to the bar in 2008, admits to breaching a personal lease contract and then proceeds to lose every single claim he brings to trial and has to pay out of pocket on counterclaims, it may suggest a profound lack of judgement, questionable legal discernment, and wobbly courtroom competency. If Kameron Kirkevold cannot successfully manage his own private legal affairs with the resources of the law firm he manages, can clients trust Kam, or Helsell Fetterman, for representation?
Read the full court ruling and the complaint District Court NO. 21CIV32812KCX
Notice: This page summarizes publicly available court records (district court NO. 21CIV32812KCX). Interpretations and conclusions are those of the author. Readers are encouraged to review the original documents and draw their own conclusions.
Made with