Wash. Rev. Code » Title 11 · Chapter 11.106
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 11.106.080 (2026)

Effect of decree

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
The decree rendered under RCW 11.106.070 shall be deemed final, conclusive, and binding upon all the parties interested including all incompetent, unborn, and unascertained beneficiaries of the trust subject only to the right of appeal under RCW 11.106.090.
[ 1985 c 30 s 102. Prior: 1984 c 149 s 135; 1955 c 33 s 30.30.080; prior: 1951 c 226 s 8. Formerly RCW 30.30.080.]

Notes:

Short title—Application—Purpose—Severability—1985 c 30: See RCW 11.02.900 through 11.02.903.
Severability—Effective dates—1984 c 149: See notes following RCW 11.02.005.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases, 2005–2014 · leading case: Barovic v. Pemberton, 128 Wash. App. 196 (Wash. Ct. App. 2005).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Barovic v. Pemberton, 128 Wash. App. 196 (Wash. Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 5× “ANALYSIS Interest ¶9 Under RCW 11.106.080, Pemberton argues that the intermediate accountings became final and binding when Barovic failed to appeal.”
Barovic v. Pemberton, 114 P.3d 1230 (Wash. Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 5× “ANALYSIS INTEREST ¶ 9 Under RCW 11.106.080, Pemberton argues that the intermediate accountings became final and binding when Barovic failed to appeal.”
Anderson v. Dussault, 333 P.3d 395 (Wash. 2014). · cites it 2× “Because the superior court had approved all the accountings and Rachel never appealed those approvals, she could not now pursue breach of trust claims based on conduct disclosed in those accountings.”
Anderson v. Dussault, 310 P.3d 854 (Wash. Ct. App. 2013). “¶21 And if the superior court enters such a decree, it “shall be deemed final, conclusive, and binding upon all the *91 parties interested including all incompetent, unborn, and unascertained beneficiaries of the trust.”
Anderson v. Dussault (Wash. 2014). · cites it 2× “The court reasoned that Rachel's claims were barred by RCW 11.106.080, a provision of the TAA that makes court approval of an accounting final and binding on all parties, even incompetent beneficiaries.”
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.