Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 11.68.110 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026

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

(1) If a personal representative who has acquired nonintervention powers does not apply to the court for either of the final decrees provided for in RCW 11.68.100 as now or hereafter amended, the personal representative shall, when the administration of the estate has been completed, file a declaration that must state as follows:

(a) The date of the decedent's death and the decedent's residence at the time of death;

(b) Whether or not the decedent died testate or intestate;

(c) If the decedent died testate, the date of the decedent's last will and testament and the date of the order probating the will;

(d) That each creditor's claim which was justly due and properly presented as required by law has been paid or otherwise disposed of by agreement with the creditor, and that the amount of taxes assessable against the estate has been determined, settled, and paid or otherwise provided for;

(e) That the personal representative has completed the administration of the decedent's estate without court intervention, and the estate is ready to be settled and distributed;

(f) If the decedent died intestate, the names, addresses (if known), and relationship of each heir of the decedent, together with the distributive share of each heir; and

(g) The amount of fees paid or to be paid to each of the following: (i) Personal representative or representatives; (ii) lawyer or lawyers; (iii) appraiser or appraisers; and (iv) accountant or accountants; and that the personal representative believes the fees to be reasonable and does not intend to obtain court approval of the amount of the fees or to submit an estate accounting to the court for approval.

(2) If:

(a)(i) The personal representative with nonintervention powers files a declaration as specified in subsection (1) of this section;

(ii) The personal representative provides the notice as required by subsection (4) of this section; and

(iii) No party, as defined in RCW 11.96A.030, petitions the court under subsection (3) of this section; then:

(b)(i) The filing of the declaration will be the legal equivalent of the entry of a decree of distribution under chapter 11.76 RCW;

(ii) The amount of fees paid or to be paid will be deemed reasonable and will be approved;

(iii) The acts of the personal representative will be approved;

(iv) The personal representative, and any bond ensuring the proper actions of the personal representative, will be discharged; and

(v) The estate will be determined to have been properly and fully distributed and settled.

(3) If the personal representative provides the notice as required by subsection (4) of this section, then, within 30 days following the filing of a declaration of completion of probate under this section, any party, as defined in RCW 11.96A.030, may petition the court under chapter 11.96A RCW to enforce the party's rights, to review the reasonableness of the fees, and/or to compel the personal representative to close the estate under RCW 11.68.100.

(4) Within five days of the date of the filing of the declaration of completion, the personal representative or the personal representative's lawyer shall mail a copy of the declaration of completion to each party as defined in RCW 11.96A.030, who: (a) Has not waived notice of the filing, in writing, filed in the cause; and (b) either has not received the full amount of the distribution to which the party is entitled or has a property right that might be affected adversely by the discharge of the personal representative under this section, together with a notice which shall be substantially as follows:

	CAPTION OF CASE	NOTICE OF FILING OF DECLARATION OF COMPLETION OF PROBATE
NOTICE IS GIVEN that the attached Declaration of Completion of Probate was filed by the undersigned in the above-entitled court on the . . . . day of . . . . . ., (year) . . . .; unless you petition the above-entitled court under chapter 11.96A RCW to enforce your rights, to review the reasonableness of the fees, and/or to compel the personal representative to close the estate under RCW 11.68.100, within thirty days after the date of the filing of the Declaration of Completion of Probate, the schedule of fees set forth in the Declaration of Completion of Probate will be deemed reasonable, the acts of the personal representative will be deemed approved and the payment of those fees will be approved, the personal representative (and any bond ensuring the proper action of the personal representative) will be automatically discharged without further order of the court, the estate will be deemed to have been properly and fully distributed and settled, and the Declaration of Completion of Probate will be final and deemed the equivalent of a Decree of Distribution entered under chapter 11.76 RCW.
. . . .
		Personal Representative's Name

(5) If all parties as defined in RCW 11.96A.030 of the decedent entitled to notice under this section waive, in writing, the notice required by this section, the personal representative will be automatically discharged without further order of the court and the declaration of completion of probate will become effective as a decree of distribution upon the date of filing thereof. In those instances where the personal representative has been required to furnish bond, and a declaration of completion is filed pursuant to this section, any bond furnished by the personal representative shall be automatically discharged upon the discharge of the personal representative.

[ 2021 c 140 s 4014; 2016 c 202 s 8; 1998 c 292 s 202; 1997 c 252 s 68; 1990 c 180 s 5; 1985 c 30 s 8. Prior: 1984 c 149 s 11; 1977 ex.s. c 234 s 26; 1974 ex.s. c 117 s 23.]

Notes:

Application—2021 c 140 ss 4003-4017, 4023, 4024, and 4026: See note following RCW 11.48.130.

Retroactive application—1998 c 292: "(1) Sections 201 through 205 of this act are remedial in nature and apply retroactively to July 27, 1997, and thereafter.

(2) Section 301 of this act is remedial in nature and applies retroactively to July 1, 1991, and thereafter." [ 1998 c 292 s 604.]

Effective dates—1998 c 292: See RCW 11.11.903.

Application—1997 c 252 ss 1-73: See note following RCW 11.02.005.

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.

Effective date, application—Severability—1977 ex.s. c 234: See notes following RCW 11.20.020.

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

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 26 cases (4 in the last 5 years), 1980–2025 · leading case: Rathbone v. Est. of Rathbone (In Re Est. of Rathbone), 412 P.3d 1283 (Wash. 2018).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Rathbone v. Est. of Rathbone (In Re Est. of Rathbone), 412 P.3d 1283 (Wash. 2018). · cites it 22× “The trial court held it had the authority to construe the will under RCW 11.”

Harder v. Harder, 341 P.3d 342 (Wash. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 11× “Chris and David argue that their notice to mediate was the equivalent of a petition for accounting under the probate statute, RCW 11.68.110. We affirm. Sutton, J. *381 FACTS ¶2 Michael K.”

Jones v. Jones, 152 Wash. 2d 1 (Wash. 2004). · cites it 3× “However, during trial, Judge Baker found that Russell breached his fiduciary duty by refusing to provide Jeffrey and Peter with financial information, estate records, valuation of the estate, and information relating to estate property during probate. CP at 102, Findings of Fact…”

In Re Est. of Jones, 93 P.3d 147 (Wash. 2004). · cites it 3× “However, during trial, Judge Baker found that Russell breached his fiduciary duty by refusing to provide Jeffery and Peter with financial information, estate records, valuation of the estate, and information relating to estate property during probate. CP at 102, Findings of Fact…”

In the Matter of Est. of Bobbitt, 806 P.2d 254 (Wash. Ct. App. 1991). · cites it 6× “In due course, they filed a declaration of completion (RCW 11.68.110), which disclosed the attorneys fees paid, 1 that the Bobbitts had each received $4,500 for services, and that Kenneth claimed reimbursement for certain expenses.”

Jones v. Jones, 116 Wash. App. 353 (Wash. Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 2× “015; former RCW 11.68.110 (1990). If they suspect skulduggery in between, a prima facie showing is sufficient to obtain a removal hearing.”

In Re the Est. of Ardell, 980 P.2d 771 (Wash. Ct. App. 1999). · cites it 2× “Under RCW 11.68.110, a nonintervention estate is closed and the personal representative discharged automatically upon the filing of the declaration of completion unless an heir, devisee or legatee has petitioned the court to approve the fees or for an accounting.”

Judson v. Associated Meats & Seafoods, 651 P.2d 222 (Wash. Ct. App. 1982). · cites it 2× “Any other party to any such transaction and his successors in interest shall be entitled to have it conclusively presumed that such transaction is necessary for the administration of the decedent's estate.”

Meryhew v. Gillingham, 893 P.2d 692 (Wash. Ct. App. 1995). · cites it 2× “See RCW 11.68.110; see also In re Estate of Bobbitt, 60 Wn.”

Barros v. Barros, 613 P.2d 547 (Wash. Ct. App. 1980). “RCW 11.68.110. Rita perhaps could have secured subsequent letters of administration under RCW 11.”

Gabriel E. Gourde & Charbonneau D. Gourde v. Ann L. Gannam, 417 P.3d 650 (Wash. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 9× “They demanded “an accounting as authorized by RCW 11.68.110(2).” CP at 60. In a letter attached to their objection, they stated that they would withdraw their objection if Gannam would re-record the deed and include the language they 2 49983-5-II proposed.”

In Re Est. of Jones, 67 P.3d 1113 (Wash. Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 2× “015; former RCW 11.68.110 (1990). If they suspect skullduggery in between, a prima facie showing is sufficient to obtain a removal hearing.”

Show all 26 citing cases →

— Wash. Rev. Code § 11.68.110(1) — 1 case

In Re The Est. Of Robert Carlton Gilkey (Wash. Ct. App. 2020).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 11.68.110(1)(e) — 1 case

Colleen M. Edwards v. Patrick Mulvihill (Wash. Ct. App. 2015).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 11.68.110(1)(g) — 1 case

Chapman v. Bonneville Power Admin. (W.D. Wash. 2020).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 11.68.110(1)(g)(ii) — 1 case

In The Matter Of The Est. Of Joseph P. Burroughs (Wash. Ct. App. 2023).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 11.68.110(2) — 9 cases

Rathbone v. Est. of Rathbone (In Re Est. of Rathbone), 412 P.3d 1283 (Wash. 2018). “The trial court held it had the authority to construe the will under RCW 11.”

Harder v. Harder, 341 P.3d 342 (Wash. Ct. App. 2015). “Chris and David argue that their notice to mediate was the equivalent of a petition for accounting under the probate statute, RCW 11.68.110. We affirm. Sutton, J. *381 FACTS ¶2 Michael K.”

Gabriel E. Gourde & Charbonneau D. Gourde v. Ann L. Gannam, 417 P.3d 650 (Wash. Ct. App. 2018). “They demanded “an accounting as authorized by RCW 11.68.110(2).” CP at 60. In a letter attached to their objection, they stated that they would withdraw their objection if Gannam would re-record the deed and include the language they 2 49983-5-II proposed.”

Gabriel E. Gourde & Charbonneau D. Gourde v. Ann L. Gannam (Wash. Ct. App. 2018).

Nicole Garza, V Jude Bailey (Wash. Ct. App. 2024).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 11.68.110(3) — 3 cases

In The Matter Of The Est. Of Joseph P. Burroughs (Wash. Ct. App. 2023).

Pauline Forsberg, V Patricia L. Forsberg (Wash. Ct. App. 2015).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 11.68.110(l)(g) — 1 case

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.