Wash. Rev. Code » Title 19 · Chapter 19.58
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 19.58.040 (2025)

Solicitation of bids

✓ 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
If bids are solicited from exhibitors for the licensing of a feature motion picture within the state, then:
(1) The invitation to bid shall specify: (a) Whether the run for which the bid is being solicited is a first, second, or subsequent run; whether the run is an exclusive or nonexclusive run; and, the geographic area for the run; (b) the names of all exhibitors who are being solicited; (c) the date and hour the invitation to bid expires; and (d) the time, date, and location, including the address, where the bids will be opened, which shall be within the state.
(2) All bids shall be submitted in writing and shall be opened at the same time and in the presence of those exhibitors, or their agents, who submitted bids and who attend the bid opening.
(3) Immediately upon being opened, the bids shall be subject to examination by the exhibitors, or their agents, who submitted bids, and who are present at the opening. Within ten business days after the bids are opened, the distributor shall notify each exhibitor who submitted a bid either the name of the winning bidder or the fact that none of the bids were acceptable.
(4) Once bids are solicited, the distributor shall license the feature motion picture only by bidding and may solicit rebids if none of the submitted bids are acceptable.
[ 1979 ex.s. c 29 s 4.]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1 case, 1986–1986 · leading case: Seven Gables Corp. v. MGM/UA Ent. Co., 721 P.2d 1 (Wash. 1986).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Seven Gables Corp. v. MGM/UA Ent. Co., 721 P.2d 1 (Wash. 1986). · cites it 65× “58 as including film licensing by negotiation within the regulating procedures of RCW 19.58.040. It challenges the act as being both unconstitutionally vague and violative of the defendant's constitutional rights.”
Wash. Rev. Code § 19.58.040(2): 1 case
Seven Gables Corp. v. MGM/UA Ent. Co., 721 P.2d 1 (Wash. 1986). “58 as including film licensing by negotiation within the regulating procedures of RCW 19.58.040. It challenges the act as being both unconstitutionally vague and violative of the defendant's constitutional rights.”
Wash. Rev. Code § 19.58.040(4): 1 case
Seven Gables Corp. v. MGM/UA Ent. Co., 721 P.2d 1 (Wash. 1986). “58 as including film licensing by negotiation within the regulating procedures of RCW 19.58.040. It challenges the act as being both unconstitutionally vague and violative of the defendant's constitutional rights.”
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.