Wash. Rev. Code » Title 16 · Chapter 16.24
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 16.24.070 (2025)

Stock on highway right-of-way—Limitations

✓ laws through the 2025 session: 2026 session laws are not yet included
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
It shall be unlawful for any person to herd or move any livestock over, along or across the right-of-way of any public highway, or portion thereof, within any stock restricted area, without having in attendance a sufficient number of persons to control the movement of such livestock and to warn or otherwise protect vehicles traveling upon such public highway from any danger by reason of such livestock being herded or moved thereon.
[ 1989 c 286 s 10; 1937 c 189 s 127; RRS s 6360-127, part. Prior: 1927 c 309 s 41, part; RRS s 6362-41, part. FORMER PART OF SECTION: 1937 c 40 s 6; RRS s 3070-3, now codified as RCW 16.24.065. Formerly RCW 16.24.070 and 16.24.080.]

Notes:

Severability—1989 c 286: See note following RCW 16.04.010.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8 cases, 1960–1982 · leading case: Scanlan v. Smith, 404 P.2d 776 (Wash. 1965).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Scanlan v. Smith, 404 P.2d 776 (Wash. 1965). · cites it 16× “[2] A motorist and his wife traveling at night on one of the state's primary highways, within a stock restricted area, collided with cattle on the highway.”
Misterek v. Washington Mineral Prods., Inc., 531 P.2d 805 (Wash. 1975). · cites it 6× “RCW 16.24.070 rather than 16.24.065 is the applicable section in this situation.”
Blodgett v. Olympic Sav. & Loan Ass'n, 646 P.2d 139 (Wash. Ct. App. 1982). · cites it 2× “The court held that the words "cause or permit" implied the requirement of either actual or constructive notice and that RCW 16.24.070 did not impose strict criminal liability on livestock owners.”
Boyce v. Adams, 549 P.2d 18 (Wash. 1976). · cites it 2× “The trial court rejected the nuisance and strict liability theories and instructed the jury upon the law of negligence, upon the King County ordinance designating the county a stock-restricted area, and upon RCW 16.24.070, which provides that it shall be unlawful for any person…”
Green v. Biles-Coleman Lumber Co., 362 P.2d 593 (Wash. 1961). · cites it 2× “[1] There was formerly a statute which gave cattle the right-of-way upon the highways of this state.”
Consol. Dairy Prods., Co. v. McDonald, 426 P.2d 978 (Wash. 1967). · cites it 3× “2 set out the following words of RCW 16.24.070: . . It shall be unlawful for any person to cause or permit any livestock to graze or stray upon any portion of the right of way of any public highway in this state, within any stock restricted area .”
Burback v. Bucher, 355 P.2d 981 (Wash. 1960). “*877 The rights and duties of the respondents are set forth in RCW 16.24.070, which provides: “It shall be unlawful for any person to cause or permit any livestock to graze or stray upon any portion of the right-of-way of any public highway of this state, within any stock…”
State v. Dear, 638 P.2d 85 (Wash. 1981). · cites it 3× “As the annotation indicates, most statutes, like ours, contain words such as "permit" or "allow", which make it clear that some fault on the part of the owner must be shown.”
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.