* Eric Sobota, Appellant V. Gregory Blair Mahlik, Respondent

NOTICE: SLIP OPINION
(not the court’s final written decision)
The opinion that begins on the next page is a slip opinion. Slip opinions are the
written opinions that are originally filed by the court.
A slip opinion is not necessarily the court’s final written decision. Slip opinions
can be changed by subsequent court orders. For example, a court may issue an
order making substantive changes to a slip opinion or publishing for precedential
purposes a previously “unpublished” opinion. Additionally, nonsubstantive edits
(for style, grammar, citation, format, punctuation, etc.) are made before the
opinions that have precedential value are published in the official reports of court
decisions: the Washington Reports 2d and the Washington Appellate Reports. An
opinion in the official reports replaces the slip opinion as the official opinion of
the court.
The slip opinion that begins on the next page is for a published opinion, and it
has since been revised for publication in the printed official reports. The official
text of the court’s opinion is found in the advance sheets and the bound volumes
of the official reports. Also, an electronic version (intended to mirror the
language found in the official reports) of the revised opinion can be found, free of
charge, at this website: https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports.
For more information about precedential (published) opinions, nonprecedential
(unpublished) opinions, slip opinions, and the official reports, see
https://www.courts.wa.gov/opinions and the information that is linked there.

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON
DIVISION ONE
ERIC SOBOTA,
Appellant,
v.
GREGORY BLAIR MAHLIK,
Respondent.
Nonparty Northwest Justice Project filed a motion to publish the court's opinion
filed April 6, 2015. 	As no respondent has appeared, we have waived the requirement
for an answer. 	See RAP 12.3(e); 1.2(c). After due consideration, the panel has
determined that the motion should be granted.
Now, therefore, it is hereby
ORDERED that the motion to publish is granted and the written opinion filed
April 6, 2015, shall be published and printed in the Washington Appellate Reports.
Done this 	^"fc 	day of May, 2015.
r-o
	'*-.'"•; O
) 	No. 72099-6-1 	on
rc 	r:i—^
t
—n J* -•
-j
)>-J;
x--= 	''J.I '"' ' "
:x: 	r"T-. "
o 	" •: r r-
) 	ORDER GRANTING 	o
-—:";-;
) 	MOTION TO PUBLISH 	UO
FOR THE PANEL:
^a^g, 	I,
 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

•;..,, p
2015 APR-6 	AM 10: I*
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON
DIVISION ONE
ERIC SOBOTA,
Appellant,
v.
GREGORY BLAIR MAHLIK.,
Respondent.
No. 72099-6-
UNPUBLISHED OPINION
FILED: 	April 6, 2015
PER CURIAM - Eric Sobota sought discretionary review of the trial court order
denying a waiver of civil filing fees and surcharges. A commissioner denied
discretionary review, and Sobota moved to modify. See RAP 17.7.
We grant the motion to modify, grant discretionary review, accelerate review,
reverse the trial court's order, and remand with instructions to waive the filing fees
and surcharges.
Sobota filed this action for personal injuries in King County Superior Court on
May 2, 2014. Along with the complaint, Sobota filed a motion seeking a waiver of
"civil filing fees and surcharges" and a supporting affidavit and financial statement.
On the same day, the trial court denied the motion for a fee waiver. The court
found that Sobota was indigent, but determined that his case "lacks merit" and
declined to waive the filing fee, ruling that "the petitioner can save his money and file
the case, but the public will not pay for it."
 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

No. 72099-6-1/2
In Jafar v. Webb. 177 Wn.2d 520, 532, 303 P.3d 1042 (2013), our Supreme
Court held that once the trial court determines that a civil litigant is indigent under
GR 34, it must waive all filing fees and surcharges:
We hold GR 34 provides a uniform standard for determining
whether an individual is indigent and further requires the court to waive all
fees and costs for individuals who meet this standard. The rule was
adopted to ensure that indigent litigants have equal access to justice.
Any fees required of indigent litigants are invalid and must be waived
under the rule.
Here, the trial court found Sobota was indigent under GR 34(a)(3)(B) ("his or her
household income is at or below 125 percent of the federal poverty guideline").
Consequently, the court erred in denying Sobota's request for a filing fee waiver.
The motion to modify is granted and review is accepted. We reverse the trial
court's order and remand with instructions to grant a waiver only of filing fees and
surcharges in accordance with GR 34 and Jafar.
Reversed and remanded.
FOR THE COURT:
JjUl^i 	f