Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 11.04.015 (2026)

Descent and distribution of real and personal estate

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

The net estate of a person dying intestate, or that portion thereof with respect to which the person shall have died intestate, shall descend subject to the provisions of RCW 11.04.250 and 11.02.070, and shall be distributed as follows:

(1) Share of surviving spouse or state registered domestic partner. The surviving spouse or state registered domestic partner shall receive the following share:

(a) All of the decedent's share of the net community estate; and

(b) One-half of the net separate estate if the intestate is survived by issue; or

(c) Three-quarters of the net separate estate if there is no surviving issue, but the intestate is survived by one or more of his or her parents, or by one or more of the issue of one or more of his or her parents; or

(d) All of the net separate estate, if there is no surviving issue nor parent nor issue of parent.

(2) Shares of others than surviving spouse or state registered domestic partner. The share of the net estate not distributable to the surviving spouse or state registered domestic partner, or the entire net estate if there is no surviving spouse or state registered domestic partner, shall descend and be distributed as follows:

(a) To the issue of the intestate; if they are all in the same degree of kinship to the intestate, they shall take equally, or if of unequal degree, then those of more remote degree shall take by representation.

(b) If the intestate not be survived by issue, then to the parent or parents who survive the intestate.

(c) If the intestate not be survived by issue or by either parent, then to those issue of the parent or parents who survive the intestate; if they are all in the same degree of kinship to the intestate, they shall take equally, or, if of unequal degree, then those of more remote degree shall take by representation.

(d) If the intestate not be survived by issue or by either parent, or by any issue of the parent or parents who survive the intestate, then to the grandparent or grandparents who survive the intestate; if both maternal and paternal grandparents survive the intestate, the maternal grandparent or grandparents shall take one-half and the paternal grandparent or grandparents shall take one-half.

(e) If the intestate not be survived by issue or by either parent, or by any issue of the parent or parents or by any grandparent or grandparents, then to those issue of any grandparent or grandparents who survive the intestate; taken as a group, the issue of the maternal grandparent or grandparents shall share equally with the issue of the paternal grandparent or grandparents, also taken as a group; within each such group, all members share equally if they are all in the same degree of kinship to the intestate, or, if some be of unequal degree, then those of more remote degree shall take by representation.

[ 2010 c 8 s 2001; 2007 c 156 s 27; 1974 ex.s. c 117 s 6; 1967 c 168 s 2; 1965 ex.s. c 55 s 1; 1965 c 145 s 11.04.015. Formerly RCW 11.04.020, 11.04.030, 11.04.050.]

Notes:

Application, construction—Severability—Effective date—1974 ex.s. c 117: See RCW 11.02.080 and notes following.

Appropriation to pay debts and expenses: Chapter 11.10 RCW.

Community property

disposition: RCW 11.02.070.

generally: Chapter 26.16 RCW.

Escheats: Chapter 11.08 RCW.

"Net estate" defined: RCW 11.02.005(12).

Payment of claims where estate insufficient: RCW 11.76.150.

Priority of sale, etc., as between realty and personalty: Chapter 11.10 RCW.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 60 cases (5 in the last 5 years), 1970–2025 · leading case: In Re the Est. of Little, 721 P.2d 950 (Wash. 1986).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

In Re the Est. of Little, 721 P.2d 950 (Wash. 1986). · cites it 12× “035), the inheritance rights of half-blood claimants as to ancestral property are extinguished even if the competing claimants are in a less preferred class of takers under the general descent and distribution statute (RCW 11.04.015). It is first necessary to compare the two…”

In Re Est. of Fleming, 21 P.3d 281 (Wash. 2001). · cites it 11× “The issue in this case is whether under Washington's intestate law (RCW 11.04.015) a biological parent who permanently terminated a parent-child relationship can inherit from her biological child if the child was *283 never adopted.”

In Re Estates of Donnelly, 502 P.2d 1163 (Wash. 1972). · cites it 8× “His estate would thus pass by the statutes governing intestacy according to RCW 11.04.015, which says: The net estate of a person dying intestate .”

Peffley-Warner v. Bowen, 778 P.2d 1022 (Wash. 1989). · cites it 4× “Warner and that appellant was not a "surviving spouse" entitled to receive a share of his estate under the intestate succession statute, RCW 11.04.015. Under RCW 11.52.010 an award in lieu of homestead may be made to the "surviving spouse" of a decedent.”

Nguyen v. State Health Med. Quality Assur., 29 P.3d 689 (Wash. 2001). “015 if the decedent had died intestate, unless the court determines on the basis of clear and convincing evidence that a smaller share, including no share at all, is more in keeping with the decedent's intent." RCW 4.24.460(2) creates a presumption of liability on the part of…”

Nguyen v. Dep't of Health, 144 Wash. 2d 516 (Wash. 2001). “095(3), dealing with “omitted spouses,” as the statute defines that term, “[t]he omitted spouse must receive an amount equal in value to that which the spouse would have received under RCW 11.04.015 if the decedent had died intestate, unless the court determines on the basis of…”

Farver v. Dep't of Ret. Sys., 644 P.2d 1149 (Wash. 1982). · cites it 3× “RCW 11.04.015. 2 Petitioners, John and Betty Berling, contend such a ruling would be contrary to the State Patrol Retirement System statute (RCW 43.”

Farver v. Dep't of Ret. Sys., 629 P.2d 903 (Wash. Ct. App. 1981). · cites it 4× “See RCW 11.04.015. In particular, Farver contends the analogy between life insurance proceeds and pension benefits is so close, see DeRevere, 5 Wn.”

Matter of Marriage of Pratt, 665 P.2d 400 (Wash. 1983). · cites it 2× “[2] Under RCW 11.04.015, if Nadine Pratt were considered married at the time of her husband's death, then as his surviving spouse, she would inherit one-half of his separate property.”

Lyon v. Lyon, 670 P.2d 272 (Wash. 1983). · cites it 2× “*415 RCW 11.04.015(1)(a) (when spouse dies, surviving spouse receives all of decedent's share of net community estate).”

Becker v. White, 298 P.3d 720 (Wash. 2013). “2 RCW 11.04.015(1); RCW 11.12.095. Thus, Nancy has a very substantial interest in the estate if the will contest were to be successful.”

Olver v. Fowler, 168 P.3d 348 (Wash. 2007). “See RCW 11.04.015. ¶ 30 Vu suggests that we hold that at the moment of death, a deceased partner in a committed, intimate relationship loses his or her equitable interest in jointly acquired property titled in the other partner's name.”

Show all 60 citing cases →

— Wash. Rev. Code § 11.04.015(1) — 4 cases

Becker v. White, 298 P.3d 720 (Wash. 2013). “2 RCW 11.04.015(1); RCW 11.12.095. Thus, Nancy has a very substantial interest in the estate if the will contest were to be successful.”

Peffley-Warner v. Bowen, 778 P.2d 1022 (Wash. 1989). “Warner and that appellant was not a "surviving spouse" entitled to receive a share of his estate under the intestate succession statute, RCW 11.04.015. Under RCW 11.52.010 an award in lieu of homestead may be made to the "surviving spouse" of a decedent.”

Est. Of Michael Petelle. Gloria Petelle v. Michelle Ersfeld Petelle, 440 P.3d 1026 (Wash. Ct. App. 2019).

In re Est. of Becker (Wash. 2013).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 11.04.015(1)(a) — 2 cases

Lyon v. Lyon, 670 P.2d 272 (Wash. 1983). “*415 RCW 11.04.015(1)(a) (when spouse dies, surviving spouse receives all of decedent's share of net community estate).”

Duxbury v. Duxbury, 304 P.3d 480 (Wash. Ct. App. 2013).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 11.04.015(1)(b) — 1 case

Bay v. Est. of Bay, 105 P.3d 434 (Wash. Ct. App. 2005).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 11.04.015(1)(c) — 2 cases

Est. Of Michael Petelle. Gloria Petelle v. Michelle Ersfeld Petelle, 440 P.3d 1026 (Wash. Ct. App. 2019).

In re Est. of Petelle (Wash. 2020).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 11.04.015(2) — 6 cases

In Re Est. of Fleming, 21 P.3d 281 (Wash. 2001). “The issue in this case is whether under Washington's intestate law (RCW 11.04.015) a biological parent who permanently terminated a parent-child relationship can inherit from her biological child if the child was *283 never adopted.”

Marzan v. Kovacs, 143 Wash. 2d 412 (Wash. 2001).

Davis v. Strus (E.D. Wash. 2020).

Davis v. Washington State Dep't of Soc. & Health Servs. (E.D. Wash. 2020).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 11.04.015(2)(a) — 2 cases

Mark D. Stine v. Dep't Of Revenue (Wash. Ct. App. 2020).

Yvette A. Bonnett, App/cross-res V. Marisol Fuentes, Res/cross-app (Wash. Ct. App. 2025).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 11.04.015(2)(b) — 6 cases

Marzan v. Kovacs, 143 Wash. 2d 412 (Wash. 2001).

In Re Est. of Fleming, 991 P.2d 128 (Wash. Ct. App. 2000).

Gonzales v. Cowen, 884 P.2d 19 (Wash. Ct. App. 1994).

In Re The Est. Of: Taylor Griffith (Wash. Ct. App. 2018).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 11.04.015(2)(c) — 4 cases

In Re the Est. of Little, 721 P.2d 950 (Wash. 1986). “035), the inheritance rights of half-blood claimants as to ancestral property are extinguished even if the competing claimants are in a less preferred class of takers under the general descent and distribution statute (RCW 11.04.015). It is first necessary to compare the two…”

Marzan v. Kovacs, 143 Wash. 2d 412 (Wash. 2001).

In Re the Est. of Cook, 698 P.2d 1076 (Wash. Ct. App. 1985).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 11.04.015(l)(b) — 1 case

Bay v. Est. of Bay, 125 Wash. App. 468 (Wash. Ct. App. 2005).

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.