Wash. Rev. Code » Title 2 · Chapter 2.48
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 2.48.060 (2026)

Admission and disbarment

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
The said board of governors shall likewise have power, in its discretion, from time to time to adopt rules, subject to the approval of the supreme court, fixing the qualifications, requirements and procedure for admission to the practice of law; and, with such approval, to establish from time to time and enforce rules of professional conduct for all members of the state bar; and, with such approval, to appoint boards or committees to examine applicants for admission; and, to investigate, prosecute and hear all causes involving discipline, disbarment, suspension or reinstatement, and make recommendations thereon to the supreme court; and, with such approval, to prescribe rules establishing the procedure for the investigation and hearing of such matters, and establishing county or district agencies to assist therein to the extent provided by such rules: PROVIDED, HOWEVER, That no person who shall have participated in the investigation or prosecution of any such cause shall sit as a member of any board or committee hearing the same.
[ 1933 c 94 s 8; RRS s 138-8.]

Notes:

Rules of court: See Rules for Lawyer Discipline, also Admission to Practice Rules.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1966–2021 · leading case: In Re Schatz, 497 P.2d 153 (Wash. 1972).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
In Re Schatz, 497 P.2d 153 (Wash. 1972). · cites it 9× “We therefore need to consider only that section, which is RCW 2.48.060: The said board of governors shall likewise have power, in its discretion, from time to time to adopt rules, subject to the approval of the supreme court, fixing the qualifications, requirements and procedure…”
Tanner Elec. Coop. v. Puget Sound Power & Light, 911 P.2d 1301 (Wash. 1996). · cites it 2× “2d 163 (1984); RCW 2.48.060, .220, .230. Our application of RCW 19.”
Short v. Demopolis, 691 P.2d 163 (Wash. 1984). · cites it 2× “It also provides that the board may make recommendations thereon to the Supreme Court. However, all such power is specifically made subject to the approval of the Supreme Court.”
Graham v. Bar Ass'n, 548 P.2d 310 (Wash. 1976). · cites it 2× “It participates in the regulation of the profession (RCW 2.48.060) and prescribes the amount of the license fee (RCW 2.”
State Ex Rel. Schwab v. Washington State Bar Ass'n, 493 P.2d 1237 (Wash. 1972). · cites it 4× “However, all such power is specifically made subject to the approval of the Supreme Court.”
Hahn v. Boeing Co., 621 P.2d 1263 (Wash. 1980). · cites it 2× “And an investigatory procedure, such as that authorized here, may work great hardship upon the visiting attorney's client, subjecting him to interrogation upon subjects unrelated to the merits of the case, perhaps undermining his confidence in his attorney, and causing further…”
State v. Cook, 525 P.2d 761 (Wash. 1974). · cites it 4× “Notwithstanding any provision of any other rule to the contrary, qualified law students, registered law clerks and graduates of approved law schools, upon application and approval in accordance with the requirements set forth in Rule 9B, may be admitted to the status of "legal…”
In Re Chi-Dooh Li, 488 P.2d 259 (Wash. 1971). · cites it 2× “The 1933 act provides (RCW 2.48.060): The said board of governors shall likewise have power, in its discretion, from time to time to adopt rules, subject to the approval of the supreme court, fixing the qualifications .”
Danzig v. Danzig, 904 P.2d 312 (Wash. Ct. App. 1995). · cites it 2× “All lawyers admitted to practice in Washington are subject to the Rules for Lawyer Discipline (RLD), and jurisdiction for that purpose continues even if the lawyer no longer practices law in this state.”
Beauregard v. Wash. State Bar Ass'n, 480 P.3d 410 (Wash. 2021). “2 (“In the exercise of its inherent and plenary authority to regulate the practice of law in Washington, the Supreme Court authorizes and supervises the [WSBA’s] activities.”
In Re the Disciplinary Proceeding Against Moody, 420 P.2d 374 (Wash. 1966). · cites it 2× “RCW 2.48.060. RCW 2.48.230 provides that "The code of ethics of the American Bar Association shall be the standard of ethics for the members of the bar of this state.”
Dodd v. Bannister, 543 P.2d 237 (Wash. 1975). “Only after pursuing all means available to them under the rules to gain a proper investigation under the rules, have they invoked the jurisdiction of this court to obtain an investigation in compliance with the rules governing investigation of grievances against a member of the…”
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.