Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 11.96A.040 (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) The superior court of every county has original subject matter jurisdiction over the probate of wills and the administration of estates of incapacitated, missing, and deceased individuals in all instances, including without limitation:

(a) When a resident of the state dies;

(b) When a nonresident of the state dies in the state; or

(2) The superior court of every county has original subject matter jurisdiction over trusts and all matters relating to trusts.

(3) The superior courts may: Probate or refuse to probate wills, appoint personal representatives, administer and settle the affairs and the estates of incapacitated, missing, or deceased individuals including but not limited to decedents' nonprobate assets; administer and settle matters that relate to nonprobate assets and arise under chapter 11.18 or 11.42 RCW; administer and settle all matters relating to trusts; administer and settle matters that relate to powers of attorney; award processes and cause to come before them all persons whom the courts deem it necessary to examine; order and cause to be issued all such writs and any other orders as are proper or necessary; and do all other things proper or incident to the exercise of jurisdiction under this section.

(4) The subject matter jurisdiction of the superior court applies without regard to venue. A proceeding or action by or before a superior court is not defective or invalid because of the selected venue if the court has jurisdiction of the subject matter of the action.

[ 2001 c 203 s 9; 1999 c 42 s 201.]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 27 cases (7 in the last 5 years), 2002–2025 · leading case: In re the Irrevocable Trust of McKean, 144 Wash. App. 333 (Wash. Ct. App. 2008).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

In re the Irrevocable Trust of McKean, 144 Wash. App. 333 (Wash. Ct. App. 2008). “” RCW 11.96A.040(2), (3). Michael does not challenge the trial court’s subject matter jurisdiction.”

In Re Irrevocable Trust of McKean, 183 P.3d 317 (Wash. Ct. App. 2008). “" RCW 11.96A.040(2)-(3). Michael does not challenge the trial court's subject matter jurisdiction.”

Ralph v. Dep't of Nat. Resources, 343 P.3d 342 (Wash. 2014). “And, in probate matters, the legislature has given to “[t]he superior court of every county” jurisdiction, RCW 11.96A.040(1), to resolve “[a] 11 matters concerning the estates and assets of incapacitated, missing, and deceased persons,” RCW 11.”

In the Matter of the Est. of: K. Wendell Reugh, 447 P.3d 544 (Wash. Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 2× “w/ 35855-1-III) In re Estate of Reugh RCW 11.96A.040 (superior court has original jurisdiction in probate and trust matters); RCW 11.”

In Re The Est. Of: Donald C. Muller, 389 P.3d 604 (Wash. Ct. App. 2016). “RCW 11.96A.040(1). The superior court adjudicates testacy and decides whether to admit the will to probate or to reject it.”

In Re Jean F. Gardner Amended Blind Trust, 70 P.3d 168 (Wash. Ct. App. 2003). “[16] RCW 11.96A.040(2). [17] See Shearson/American Exp.”

In Re Marriage of McKean, 38 P.3d 1053 (Wash. Ct. App. 2002). “" [3] RCW 11.96A.040 gives the superior court subject matter jurisdiction over trust matters.”

In re the Marriage of McKean, 110 Wash. App. 191 (Wash. Ct. App. 2002). “” RCW 11.96A.040 gives the superior court subject matter jurisdiction over trust matters.”

Gardner v. Duryee, 117 Wash. App. 235 (Wash. Ct. App. 2003). “RCW 11.96A.040(2). See Shearson/Am. Express, Inc.”

In Re Guardianship of Wells, 208 P.3d 1126 (Wash. Ct. App. 2009). “[15] RCW 11.96A.040(1). [16] We recognize that the case of Britannia Holdings Ltd.”

Est. Of Eva Ann Sylvester (Wash. Ct. App. 2025). · cites it 5× “010; RCW 11.96A.040. First, RCW 2.08.010 generally reiterates that the “superior court shall have original jurisdiction .”

Est. Of Mildred G. Johnson (Wash. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 4× “Johnson was appointed personal representative with nonintervention powers the same day and the probate was opened in Pierce County under RCW 11.96A.040 and former RCW 11.96A.050(3).”

Show all 27 citing cases →

— Wash. Rev. Code § 11.96A.040(1) — 5 cases

In Re Guardianship of Wells, 208 P.3d 1126 (Wash. Ct. App. 2009). “[15] RCW 11.96A.040(1). [16] We recognize that the case of Britannia Holdings Ltd.”

In Re The Est. Of: Donald C. Muller (Wash. Ct. App. 2017).

Kevin Porter v. Nathaniel Boisso (Wash. Ct. App. 2015).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 11.96A.040(1)(c) — 1 case

In re the Est. of Quentin J. Porter (Wash. Ct. App. 2014).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 11.96A.040(2) — 12 cases

In re the Irrevocable Trust of McKean, 144 Wash. App. 333 (Wash. Ct. App. 2008). “” RCW 11.96A.040(2), (3). Michael does not challenge the trial court’s subject matter jurisdiction.”

In Re Irrevocable Trust of McKean, 183 P.3d 317 (Wash. Ct. App. 2008). “" RCW 11.96A.040(2)-(3). Michael does not challenge the trial court's subject matter jurisdiction.”

In Re Jean F. Gardner Amended Blind Trust, 70 P.3d 168 (Wash. Ct. App. 2003). “[16] RCW 11.96A.040(2). [17] See Shearson/American Exp.”

Gardner v. Duryee, 117 Wash. App. 235 (Wash. Ct. App. 2003). “RCW 11.96A.040(2). See Shearson/Am. Express, Inc.”

In Re Quach Living Trust (Wash. Ct. App. 2025).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 11.96A.040(3) — 1 case

In Re The Est. Of Sharon Marie O'hara (Wash. Ct. App. 2024).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 11.96A.040(4) — 2 cases

Porter v. Boisso, 354 P.3d 892 (Wash. Ct. App. 2015).

Kevin Porter v. Nathaniel Boisso (Wash. Ct. App. 2015).

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.