Wash. Rev. Code » Title 19 · Chapter 19.190
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 19.190.080 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
It is a violation of this chapter to solicit, request, or take any action to induce a person to provide personally identifying information by means of a web page, electronic mail message, or otherwise using the internet by representing oneself, either directly or by implication, to be another person, without the authority or approval of such other person.
[ 2005 c 378 s 2.]

Notes:

Severability—2005 c 378: "If any provision of this act or its application to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of the act or the application of the provision to other persons or circumstances is not affected." [ 2005 c 378 s 6.]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases, 2009–2017 · leading case: Gordon v. Virtumundo, Inc., 575 F.3d 1040 (9th Cir. 2009).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Gordon v. Virtumundo, Inc., 575 F.3d 1040 (9th Cir. 2009). · cites it 4× “" Wash. Rev.Code § 19.190.080. The court gave leave to amend the complaint to cure pleading deficiencies, but Gordon never did so.”
Gragg v. Orange Cab Co., 145 F. Supp. 3d 1046 (W.D. Wash. 2015). “- A person who seeks damages under this subsection may only bring an action against a person or entity that directly violates RCW 19.190.080 [the phishing prohibition].”
Wright v. Lyft, Inc. (Wash. 2017). · cites it 4× “We also conclude that while the plain language of CEMA's liquidated damages provision does not explicitly replace the causation or injury elements of a CPA claim, because the provision provides automatic damages for violations without condition, injury and causation do not need…”
Gordon v. Virtumundo Inc (9th Cir. 2009). · cites it 2× “” Wash. Rev. Code § 19.190.080 . The court gave leave to amend the complaint to cure pleading deficiencies, but Gordon never did so.”
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.