failure to assign error in Washington

46 Washington opinions name it 2 courts 1955–2026 11 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Washington courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (7)

Case	Followed	Cited
Escude v. KING COUNTY PUBLIC HOSP.green washctapp · 2003 · cited in 8 Washington opinions naming this issue, 2008–2026 2 sentences 2026App. 183 , 190 n.4, 69 P.3d 895 (2003) (“It is well settled that a party’s failure to assign error to or provide argument and citation to authority in support of an assignment of error, as required under RAP 10.3, precludes appellate consideration of an alleged error.”). 4 87320-2-I/5 (citing RCW 59.18.130, .180(2)). 2025App. 183 , 190 n.4, 69 P.3d 895 (2003) (“It is well settled that a party’s failure to assign error to or provide argument and citation to authority in support of an assignment of error, as required under RAP 10.3, precludes appellate consideration of an alleged error.”); State v. Hill, 123 Wn.2d 641, 644 , 870 P.2d 313 (1994) (“It is well-established law that an unchallenged finding of fact will be accepted as a verity upon appeal.”). 20 No. 40173-1-III Pacific Shoreline v. First Liberty Bond Addendum controlled the closing date.	6	8
State v. Olsongreen wash · 1995 · cited in 5 Washington opinions naming this issue, 2001–2020 2 sentences 2016Because his argument is clear, the failure to assign error does not hinder our review.70 We reverse McKinnon's conviction for theft by deception. (jDKtT^ WE CONCUR: //stA;^/ facy 70 See State v. Olson, 126 Wn.2d 315, 323 , 893 P.2d 629 (1995). 16 2016Because his argument is clear, the failure to assign error does not hinder our review.70 We reverse McKinnon's conviction for theft by deception. (jDKtT^ WE CONCUR: //stA;^/ facy 70 See State v. Olson, 126 Wn.2d 315, 323 , 893 P.2d 629 (1995). 16	2	5
Emmerson v. Weilepgreen washctapp · 2005 · cited in 3 Washington opinions naming this issue, 2020–2026 2 sentences 2026See Emmerson v. Weilep, 126 Wn. 2020Susan does not assign error or make any argument regarding the superior court’s denial of an award of attorney fees. “‘It is well settled that a party’s failure to assign error to or provide argument and citation to authority in support of an assignment of error, as required under RAP 10.3, precludes appellate consideration of an alleged error.’” Emmerson v. Weilep, 126 Wn.	1	3
State v. Hillgreen wash · 1994 · cited in 2 Washington opinions naming this issue, 2018–2025 2 sentences 2025App. 183 , 190 n.4, 69 P.3d 895 (2003) (“It is well settled that a party’s failure to assign error to or provide argument and citation to authority in support of an assignment of error, as required under RAP 10.3, precludes appellate consideration of an alleged error.”); State v. Hill, 123 Wn.2d 641, 644 , 870 P.2d 313 (1994) (“It is well-established law that an unchallenged finding of fact will be accepted as a verity upon appeal.”). 20 No. 40173-1-III Pacific Shoreline v. First Liberty Bond Addendum controlled the closing date. 2025App. 183 , 190 n.4, 69 P.3d 895 (2003) (“It is well settled that a party’s failure to assign error to or provide argument and citation to authority in support of an assignment of error, as required under RAP 10.3, precludes appellate consideration of an alleged error.”); State v. Hill, 123 Wn.2d 641, 644 , 870 P.2d 313 (1994) (“It is well-established law that an unchallenged finding of fact will be accepted as a verity upon appeal.”). 20 No. 40173-1-III Pacific Shoreline v. First Liberty Bond Addendum controlled the closing date.	1	2
Noble v. Lubringreen washctapp · 2003 · cited in 2 Washington opinions naming this issue, 2024–2025 2 sentences 2025App. 812, 817 , 60 P.3d 1224 (2003) (“[A]ppellate court may excuse a party’s failure to assign error where the briefing makes the nature of the challenge clear and the challenged finding is argued in the text of the brief.”). 11 No. 87058-1-I/12 reasons.” Id. 2025App. 812, 817 , 60 P.3d 1224 (2003) (“[A]ppellate court may excuse a party’s failure to assign error where the briefing makes the nature of the challenge clear and the challenged finding is argued in the text of the brief.”). 11 No. 87058-1-I/12 reasons.” Id.	1	2
Hurlbert v. Gordongreen washctapp · 1992 · cited in 1 Washington opinions naming this issue, 1995–1995	1	1
Hitchcock v. Department of Retirement Systemsgreen washctapp · 1984 · cited in 1 Washington opinions naming this issue, 1988–1988	1	1

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

Case	Negative	Cited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Washington. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (32)

Case	Cited	Years
Paulson v. Higgins neutral wash · 1953 2 sentences 2001Santos v. Mack, 46 Wn.2d 743, 744 , 284 P.2d 290 (1955) (citing Paulson v. Higgins, 43 Wn.2d 81 , 260 P.2d 318 , 266 P.2d 800 (1953)). 1955In Paulson v. Higgins, 43 Wn. (2d) 81, 260 P. (2d) 318 , 266 P. (2d) 800 , in which appellants had moved this court for leave to file an amended opening brief to cure the failure to assign error to the trial court’s findings of fact, we denied the motion and said: “If there is to be a rule, there must be a point at which failure to comply therewith can no longer be corrected.	3	1955–2001
Noble v. Lubrin green washctapp · 2003 2 sentences 2024Noble v. Lubrin, 114 Wn. 2014Noble v. Lubrin, 114 Wn.	2	2014–2024
Emmerson v. Weilep green washctapp · 2005 2 sentences 2020App. 930, 939-40 , 110 P.3d 214 (2005) (quoting Escude ex 11 No. 52892-4-II rel. 2017App. 930, 939-40 , 110 P.3d 214 (2005) (" 'It is well settled that a party's failure to assign error to or provide argument and citation to authority in support of an assignment of error, as required under RAP 10.3, precludes appellate consideration of an alleged error.' "(quoting Escude ex rel.	2	2017–2020
Washington Optometric Ass'n v. County of Pierce green wash · 1968 2 sentences 2019Washington Optometric Ass'n, 73 Wn.2d at 448 . 7 No. 77638-0-1/8 entire remaining balance becomes due and that statute of limitations is triggered for all installments that had not previously become due." Gibbon, 195 Wn. 1987Duckworth v. Bonney Lk., 91 Wn.2d 19, 21-22 , 586 P.2d 860 (1978); Washington Optometric Ass'n v. County of Pierce, 73 Wn.2d 445, 448 , 438 P.2d 861 (1968).	2	1987–2019
State v. Perry green wash · 1992 2 sentences 2017Three and a half months later, the defendant first "raised the issue of the State's failure to assign error to the order of dismissal." Id. 2017Three and a half months later, the defendant first "raised the issue of the State's failure to assign error to the order of dismissal." Id.	2	2017–2017
Cowiche Canyon Conservancy v. Bosley green wash · 1992 2 sentences 2003Hollis v. Garwall, Inc., 137 Wn.2d 683 , 689 n.4, 974 P.2d 836 (1999); Cowiche Canyon Conservancy v. Bosley, 118 Wn.2d 801, 809 , 828 P.2d 549 (1992). 2003Hollis v. Garwall, Inc., 137 Wn.2d 683 , 689 n.4, 974 P.2d 836 (1999); Cowiche Canyon Conservancy v. Bosley, 118 Wn.2d 801, 809 , 828 P.2d 549 (1992).	2	2003–2003
Hollis v. Garwall, Inc. green wash · 1999 2 sentences 2003Hollis v. Garwall, Inc., 137 Wn.2d 683 , 689 n.4, 974 P.2d 836 (1999); Cowiche Canyon Conservancy v. Bosley, 118 Wn.2d 801, 809 , 828 P.2d 549 (1992). 2003Hollis v. Garwall, Inc., 137 Wash.2d 683 , 689 n. 4, 974 P.2d 836 (1999); Cowiche Canyon Conservancy v. Bosley, 118 Wash.2d 801, 809 , 828 P.2d 549 (1992).	2	2003–2003
Hollis v. Garwall, Inc. green wash · 1999 2 sentences 2003Hollis v. Garwall, Inc., 137 Wn.2d 683 , 689 n.4, 974 P.2d 836 (1999); Cowiche Canyon Conservancy v. Bosley, 118 Wn.2d 801, 809 , 828 P.2d 549 (1992). 2003Hollis v. Garwall, Inc., 137 Wash.2d 683 , 689 n. 4, 974 P.2d 836 (1999); Cowiche Canyon Conservancy v. Bosley, 118 Wash.2d 801, 809 , 828 P.2d 549 (1992).	2	2003–2003
State v. Niedergang green washctapp · 1986 2 sentences 2002State v. Niedergang, 43 Wash.App. 656, 660-61 , 719 P.2d 576 (1986). 2002State v. Niedergang, 43 Wn.	2	2002–2002
Santos v. Mack neutral wash · 1955 2 sentences 2001Santos v. Mack, 46 Wn.2d 743, 744 , 284 P.2d 290 (1955) (citing Paulson v. Higgins, 43 Wn.2d 81 , 260 P.2d 318 , 266 P.2d 800 (1953)). 2001Santos v. Mack, 46 Wn.2d 743, 744 , 284 P.2d 290 (1955) (citing Paulson v. Higgins, 43 Wn.2d 81 , 260 P.2d 318 , 266 P.2d 800 (1953)).	2	2001–2001
Greater Harbor 2000 v. City of Seattle green wash · 1997 2 sentences 2000Greater Harbor, 132 Wn.2d at 279 . 2000Greater Harbor, 132 Wash.2d at 279 , 937 P.2d 1082 .	2	2000–2000
State v. Garnica green washctapp · 2001 1 sentence 2025App. 762, 768 , 20 P.3d 1069 (2001) (holding that the defendant’s failure to assign error to the sentencing court’s findings of fact rendered the facts verities on appeal).	1	2025–2025
In re the Marriage of Mueller green washctapp · 2007 1 sentence 2025And “where the evidentiary standard is clear and convincing, we uphold the trial court’s findings of fact if they are supported by ‘highly probable’ substantial evidence.” In re Marriage of Mueller, 140 Wn.	1	2025–2025
Bank of Washington v. Burgraff neutral washctapp · 1984 1 sentence 2024Bank of Wash. v. Burgraff, 38 Wn.	1	2024–2024
State v. Clark green washctapp · 1988 1 sentence 2022State v. Clark, 53 Wn.	1	2022–2022
Jackson v. Quality Loan Service Corp. green washctapp · 2015 1 sentence 2021Jackson v. Quality Loan Service Corp., 186 Wn.	1	2021–2021
Regelbrugge v. Snohomish Cnty. neutral wash · 2019 1 sentence 2020App. 2d 896, 904–05, 432 P.3d 841 , review denied, 193 Wn.2d 1009 , 439 P.3d 1069 (2019) (considering the merits of an appeal, despite a failure to assign error, where the appellant’s claims were clear in the briefing); RAP 1.2(a) (“[t]hese rules will be liberally interpreted to promote justice”). 4 Donald also says that Edward failed to substantially comply with TEDRA by not showing good cause.	1	2020–2020
Am. Hotel & Lodging Ass'n v. City of Seattle neutral wash · 2019 1 sentence 2020App. 2d 896, 904–05, 432 P.3d 841 , review denied, 193 Wn.2d 1009 , 439 P.3d 1069 (2019) (considering the merits of an appeal, despite a failure to assign error, where the appellant’s claims were clear in the briefing); RAP 1.2(a) (“[t]hese rules will be liberally interpreted to promote justice”). 4 Donald also says that Edward failed to substantially comply with TEDRA by not showing good cause.	1	2020–2020
Nejin v. City of Seattle green washctapp · 1985 1 sentence 2020“A trial court’s findings of fact that are supported by substantial evidence will not be disturbed on appeal.” Nejin, 40 Wn.	1	2020–2020
State v. Yokley neutral washctapp · 1998 2 sentences 2020However, a failure to assign error will not preclude a consideration of the merits if it is “reasonably clear from the arguments in the brief, the opposing party has not been prejudiced, and this court has not been overly inconvenienced.” State v. Yokley, 91 Wn. 2020App. 773 , 777 n.6, 959 P.2d 694 (1998).	1	2020–2020
Robel v. Roundup Corp. green wash · 2002 1 sentence 2020“Furthermore, mixed questions of law and fact are subject to review despite a party’s failure to assign error to the finding.” Robel, 148 Wn.2d at 60 .	1	2020–2020
Aaron Richardson v. Department Of Labor & Industries neutral washctapp · 2018 1 sentence 2020App. 2d 896, 904–05, 432 P.3d 841 , review denied, 193 Wn.2d 1009 , 439 P.3d 1069 (2019) (considering the merits of an appeal, despite a failure to assign error, where the appellant’s claims were clear in the briefing); RAP 1.2(a) (“[t]hese rules will be liberally interpreted to promote justice”). 4 Donald also says that Edward failed to substantially comply with TEDRA by not showing good cause.	1	2020–2020
4518 S. 256th, LLC v. Karen L. Gibbon, PS green washctapp · 2016 1 sentence 2019Washington Optometric Ass'n, 73 Wn.2d at 448 . 7 No. 77638-0-1/8 entire remaining balance becomes due and that statute of limitations is triggered for all installments that had not previously become due." Gibbon, 195 Wn.	1	2019–2019
Camer v. Seattle Post-Intelligencer green washctapp · 1986 1 sentence 2019Camer v. Seattle Post-Intelligencer, 45 Wn.	1	2019–2019
Harris v. Urell green washctapp · 2006 1 sentence 2017Harris v. Urell, 133 Wn.	1	2017–2017
Escude v. King County Public Hospital District No. 2 green washctapp · 2003	1	2008–2008
State Ex Rel. Carroll v. Junker green wash · 1971	1	2003–2003
Greater Harbor 2000 v. City of Seattle green wash · 1997	1	2000–2000
State v. Fortun green wash · 1981	1	1995–1995
Duckworth v. City of Bonney Lake green wash · 1978	1	1987–1987
State v. Agee green wash · 1977	1	1981–1981
State v. Daugherty green wash · 1980	1	1981–1981

Statutes the citing opinions construe

WA § Wash. Rev. Code § 2.06.040 (10) WA § Wash. Rev. Code § 13.34.030 (3) WA § Wash. Rev. Code § 4.84.340 (3) WA § Wash. Rev. Code § 4.84.350 (3)

Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.

Where else courts name it

WA 46 (1955–2026) IN 7 (1983–2008) TX 7 (1969–2007) OR 7 (1999–2014) NC 3 (2002–2009) GA 3 (1933–1937) OH 2 (2007–2016) FL 2 (1966–1970)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check