Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 2.44.050 (2026)

Notice of change and substitution

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
When an attorney is changed, as provided in RCW 2.44.040, written notice of the change, and of the substitution of a new attorney, or of the appearance of the party in person, must be given to the adverse party; until then, he or she shall be bound to recognize the former attorney.
[ 2011 c 336 s 61; Code 1881 s 3284; 1863 p 405 s 10; RRS s 134.]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7 cases, 1965–2013 · leading case: Jones v. Home Care of Washington, Inc., 216 P.3d 1106 (Wash. Ct. App. 2009).
Jones v. Home Care of Washington, Inc., 216 P.3d 1106 (Wash. Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 11× “¶ 16 CR 71 and RCW 2.44.050 consider the withdrawal of counsel.”
Haller v. Wallis, 573 P.2d 1302 (Wash. 1978). “040, written notice of the change, and of the substitution of a new attorney, or of the appearance of the party in person, must be given to the adverse party; until then, he shall be bound to recognize the former attorney.”
Jones v. Home Care of Washington, Inc., 152 Wash. App. 674 (Wash. Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 10× “¶16 CR 71 and RCW 2.44.050 consider the withdrawal of counsel.”
Robbins v. Legacy Health Sys., Inc., 311 P.3d 96 (Wash. Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 2× “See also RCW 2.44.050 (focusing on notice to opposing counsel); Jones v.”
Hansen v. Wightman, 538 P.2d 1238 (Wash. Ct. App. 1975). “” RCW 2.44.050 reads: “When an attorney is changed, as provided in RCW 2.”
Peterson v. David, 419 P.2d 138 (Wash. 1966). “Affidavits show that letters were mailed to Talbot, attorney for the Davids, to Sullivan (in compliance with RCW 2.44.050, since he was still attorney of record for the Hugheses), and to the Hugheses themselves, by which three days notice of the entry of findings and conclusions…”
Lipp v. Hendrick, 397 P.2d 848 (Wash. 1965). “Under the circumstances of an unsettled relationship, the defendant was bound to follow the dictates of RCW 2.44.050: “When an attorney is changed, as provided in RCW 2.”
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.