Wash. Rev. Code § 11.96A.100
Procedural rules
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov
JustiaTitle on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Unless rules of court require or this title provides otherwise, or unless a court orders otherwise:
(1) A judicial proceeding under RCW 11.96A.090 is to be commenced by filing a petition with the court;
(2) A summons must be served in accordance with this chapter and, where not inconsistent with these rules, the procedural rules of court, however, if the proceeding is commenced as an action incidental to an existing judicial proceeding relating to the same trust or estate or nonprobate asset, notice must be provided by summons only with respect to those parties who were not already parties to the existing judicial proceedings;
(3) The summons need only contain the following language or substantially similar language:
SUPERIOR COURT OF WASHINGTON FOR (. . .) COUNTY | |||
IN RE . . . . . . | ) | ||
) | No. . . . | ||
) | Summons | ||
) | |||
TO THE RESPONDENT OR OTHER INTERESTED PARTY: A petition has been filed in the superior court of Washington for (. . .) County. Petitioner's claim is stated in the petition, a copy of which is served upon you with this summons.
In order to defend against or to object to the petition, you must answer the petition by stating your defense or objections in writing, and by serving your answer upon the person signing this summons not later than five days before the date of the hearing on the petition. Your failure to answer within this time limit might result in a default judgment being entered against you without further notice. A default judgment grants the petitioner all that the petitioner seeks under the petition because you have not filed an answer.
If you wish to seek the advice of a lawyer, you should do so promptly so that your written answer, if any, may be served on time.
This summons is issued under RCW 11.96A.100(3).
(Signed) . . . . . . . . . . . .
Print or Type Name
Dated: . . . . . .
Telephone Number: . . . . . .
(4) Subject to other applicable statutes and court rules, the clerk of each of the superior courts shall fix the time for any hearing on a matter on application by a party, and no order of the court shall be required to fix the time or to approve the form or content of the notice of a hearing;
(5) The answer to the petition and any counterclaims or cross-claims must be served on the parties or the parties' virtual representatives and filed with the court at least five days before the date of the hearing, and all replies to the counterclaims and cross-claims must be served on the parties or the parties' virtual representatives and filed with the court at least two days before the date of the hearing;
(6) Proceedings under this chapter are subject to the mediation and arbitration provisions of this chapter. Except as specifically provided in RCW 11.96A.310, the provisions of chapter 7.06 RCW do not apply;
(7) Testimony of witnesses may be by affidavit;
(8) Unless requested otherwise by a party in a petition or answer, the initial hearing must be a hearing on the merits to resolve all issues of fact and all issues of law;
(9) Any party may move the court for an order relating to a procedural matter, including discovery, and for summary judgment, in the original petition, answer, response, or reply, or in a separate motion, or at any other time; and
(10) If the initial hearing is not a hearing on the merits or does not result in a resolution of all issues of fact and all issues of law, the court may enter any order it deems appropriate, which order may (a) resolve such issues as it deems proper, (b) determine the scope of discovery, and (c) set a schedule for further proceedings for the prompt resolution of the matter.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 41
cases (14 in the last 5 years), 2006–2026 · leading case: In Re Estate of Kordon
In Re Estate of Kordon (2006)
“Cleveland issued a citation on October 9, 2003, but the superior court dismissed the will contest for lack of jurisdiction on December 9, 2003.”
Cleveland v. Duke (2006)
“Initially, the Court of Appeals reversed, holding RCW 11.96A.100 exempted her from issuing a citation to Duke.”
In re the Estate of Bernard (2014)
“timely provides James with a summons for such hearing pursuant to RCW 11.96A.100 (and otherwise complies with the substantive and procedural provisions of RCW 11.”
Sloans v. Berry (2015)
“020, and TEDRA § 303 — Procedural rules, now RCW 11.96A.100. A summons must be served in accordance with this chapter and, where not inconsistent with these rules, the procedural rules of court, however, if the proceeding is commenced as an action incidental to an existing…”
Hayes v. Hayes (2015)
“James, in turn, commented that the hearing was on the merits pursuant to RCW 11.96A.100, which allows the trial court to resolve all issues of fact and all issues of law.”
Fitzgerald v. Mountain-West Resources, Inc. (2012)
“The statute upon which Mountain-West relies states: In all matters governed by this title, discovery shall be permitted only in the following matters: (1) A judicial proceeding that places one or more specific issues in controversy that has been commenced under RCW 11.96A.100,…”
Foster v. Gilliam (2011)
“" RCW 11.96A.100(7). It is not necessary that the court hear oral testimony in order to make findings.”
In re the Estate of Wimberley (2015)
“¶85 RCW 11.96A.100(5), a section of TEDRA, provides that in a trust dispute [t]he answer to the petition and any counterclaims or cross-claims must be served on the parties or the parties’ virtual *517 representatives and filed with the court at least five days before the date…”
Estate of Jepsen v. Miles (2015)
“as provided in RCW 11.96A.100,” Laws of 2006, ch. 360, § 9 (codified at RCW 11.”
Jeffrey R. Radliff, V. Paul Schmidt, P.r. Of Estate Of Royster (2023)
“” RCW 11.96A.100(8). Here, there was no request in the petition(s) or answer for the initial hearing to be anything other than a hearing on the merits.”
Griffith v. Sherry (2010)
“RCW 11.96A.100. When he concluded that the meaning of the wills was unambiguous and declared their meaning, he resolved the only claim *76 raised by the TEDRA petitions.”
In Re Estate of Sherry (2010)
“RCW 11.96A.100. When he concluded that the meaning of the wills was unambiguous and declared their meaning, he resolved the only claim raised by the TEDRA petitions.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 11.96A.100(1) — 2 cases
Estate Of Mildred G. Johnson (2016)
— Wash. Rev. Code § 11.96A.100(10) — 4 cases
In Re Estate of Sherry (2010)
“RCW 11.96A.100. When he concluded that the meaning of the wills was unambiguous and declared their meaning, he resolved the only claim raised by the TEDRA petitions.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 11.96A.100(10)(c) — 1 case
— Wash. Rev. Code § 11.96A.100(2) — 8 cases
In Re Estate of Kordon (2006)
“Cleveland issued a citation on October 9, 2003, but the superior court dismissed the will contest for lack of jurisdiction on December 9, 2003.”
Cleveland v. Duke (2006)
“Initially, the Court of Appeals reversed, holding RCW 11.96A.100 exempted her from issuing a citation to Duke.”
Sloans v. Berry (2015)
“020, and TEDRA § 303 — Procedural rules, now RCW 11.96A.100. A summons must be served in accordance with this chapter and, where not inconsistent with these rules, the procedural rules of court, however, if the proceeding is commenced as an action incidental to an existing…”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 11.96A.100(3) — 1 case
— Wash. Rev. Code § 11.96A.100(5) — 1 case
In re the Estate of Wimberley (2015)
“¶85 RCW 11.96A.100(5), a section of TEDRA, provides that in a trust dispute [t]he answer to the petition and any counterclaims or cross-claims must be served on the parties or the parties’ virtual *517 representatives and filed with the court at least five days before the date…”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 11.96A.100(7) — 10 cases
Foster v. Gilliam (2011)
“" RCW 11.96A.100(7). It is not necessary that the court hear oral testimony in order to make findings.”
Foster v. Gilliam (2011)
Estate Of Mildred G. Johnson (2016)
— Wash. Rev. Code § 11.96A.100(8) — 13 cases
Sloans v. Berry (2015)
“020, and TEDRA § 303 — Procedural rules, now RCW 11.96A.100. A summons must be served in accordance with this chapter and, where not inconsistent with these rules, the procedural rules of court, however, if the proceeding is commenced as an action incidental to an existing…”
Jeffrey R. Radliff, V. Paul Schmidt, P.r. Of Estate Of Royster (2023)
“” RCW 11.96A.100(8). Here, there was no request in the petition(s) or answer for the initial hearing to be anything other than a hearing on the merits.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 11.96A.100(9) — 5 cases
Estate Of James W. Jordan (2020)
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.