Wash. Rev. Code » Title 2 · Chapter 2.60
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 2.60.010 (2026)

Definitions

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
As used in this chapter:
(1) The term "certificate procedure" shall mean the procedure authorized herein by which a federal court in disposing of a cause pending before it submits a question of local law to the supreme court for answer;
(2) The term "federal court" means any court of the United States of America including the supreme court of the United States, courts of appeal, district courts and any other court created by act of congress;
(3) The term "supreme court" shall mean supreme court of Washington;
(4) The term "record" shall mean: (a) A stipulation of facts approved by the federal court showing the nature of the case and the circumstances out of which the question of law arises or such part of the pleadings, proceedings and testimony in the cause pending before the federal court as in its opinion is necessary to enable the supreme court to answer the question submitted; (b) a statement of the question of local law certified for answer. The record shall contain a certificate under the official seal of the court, signed by the chief judge of a multi-judge federal court or judge of the district court utilizing certificate procedure stating that the record contains all matters in the pending cause deemed material for consideration of the local law question certified for answer;
(5) The term "supplemental record" shall mean the original or copies of any other portion of the proceedings, pleadings and testimony before the federal court deemed desirable by the supreme court in the determination of the local law question certified for answer. The supplemental record shall contain a certificate under the official seal of the court signed by the chief judge of such multi-judge federal court or judge of the district court, certifying that the supplemental record contains all additional matters requested;
(6) The term "opinion" shall mean the written opinion of the supreme court of Washington and shall include the certificate of the clerk of such court under seal of court stating that the opinion is in answer to the local law question submitted.
[ 1965 c 99 s 1.]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 25 cases (7 in the last 5 years), 1968–2024 · leading case: Jongeward v. BNSF Ry. Co., 278 P.3d 157 (Wash. 2012).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Jongeward v. BNSF Ry. Co., 278 P.3d 157 (Wash. 2012). · cites it 2× “FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY ¶ 2 The parties stipulated to the following facts that constitute the record under RCW 2.60.010(4): This is a civil case brought by [Jongeward] against Defendant BNSF.”
Broughton Lumber Co. v. BNSF Ry. Co., 278 P.3d 173 (Wash. 2012). · cites it 2× “FACTUAL HISTORY ¶ 2 The parties stipulated [3] to the following facts that constitute the record under RCW 2.60.010(4): This is a civil case brought by plaintiff against defendants.”
Frias v. Asset Foreclosure Servs., Inc., 334 P.3d 529 (Wash. 2014). “RCW 2.60.010(4)-(5); RAP 16.16(d); cf. Bain, 175 Wn.”
Durant v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 419 P.3d 400 (Wash. 2018). “See RCW 2.60.010(4), .030(2). 2 Order at 4 (July 10, 2017) (granting certified question).”
Est. of Madsen v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue, 650 P.2d 196 (Wash. 1982). · cites it 2× “In accordance with an order of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and pursuant to RCW 2.60.010(4), the parties have stipulated to the following facts: Mattias Arnold Madsen and Norma V.”
Washington Water Power Co. v. Graybar Elec. Co., 774 P.2d 1199 (Wash. 1989). “See RCW 2.60.010(6), 2.60.020 (Supreme Court opinion should answer "the local law question submitted" by the federal court).”
In Re Elliott, 446 P.2d 347 (Wash. 1968). · cites it 2× “” “Opinion” as that term is defined in RCW 2.60.010 (6) means “the written opinion of the supreme court of Washington.”
Centurion Props. III, LLC v. Chicago Title Ins., 793 F.3d 1087 (9th Cir. 2015). “The Clerk of Court is hereby ordered to transmit to the Washington Supreme Court, under official seal of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, a copy of this order and all briefs and excerpts of record pursuant to Wash. Rev.Code §§ 2.60.010(4), 2.60.030(2),…”
Spokane Concrete Prods., Inc. v. U.S. Bank, 892 P.2d 98 (Wash. 1995). “RCW 2.60.010(4). Facts Spokane Concrete Products, Inc.”
Waterjet Tech. v. Flow Intern. Corp., 996 P.2d 598 (Wash. 2000). “RCW 2.60.010(4). FACTS Waterjet, plaintiff in this action, is a Washington corporation engaged in research and development of high pressure and abrasive waterjet cutting, drilling, and milling technology.”
Edward Bylsma v. Burger King Corp., 676 F.3d 779 (9th Cir. 2012). “The Clerk of Court is hereby ordered to transmit forthwith to the Washington Supreme Court, under official seal of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, a copy of this order and all briefs and excerpts of record pursuant to Wash. Rev.Code §§ 2.60.010(4),…”
Cornhusker Cas. Ins. v. Kachman, 514 F.3d 982 (9th Cir. 2008). “The clerk of our court is hereby ordered to transmit forthwith to the Washington State Supreme Court, under official seal of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, a copy of this order and all relevant briefs and excerpts of record pursuant to RCW §§ 2.60.010,…”
Show all 25 citing cases →
— Wash. Rev. Code § 2.60.010(4) — 12 cases
Jongeward v. BNSF Ry. Co., 278 P.3d 157 (Wash. 2012). “FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY ¶ 2 The parties stipulated to the following facts that constitute the record under RCW 2.60.010(4): This is a civil case brought by [Jongeward] against Defendant BNSF.”
Broughton Lumber Co. v. BNSF Ry. Co., 278 P.3d 173 (Wash. 2012). “FACTUAL HISTORY ¶ 2 The parties stipulated [3] to the following facts that constitute the record under RCW 2.60.010(4): This is a civil case brought by plaintiff against defendants.”
Frias v. Asset Foreclosure Servs., Inc., 334 P.3d 529 (Wash. 2014). “RCW 2.60.010(4)-(5); RAP 16.16(d); cf. Bain, 175 Wn.”
Durant v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 419 P.3d 400 (Wash. 2018). “See RCW 2.60.010(4), .030(2). 2 Order at 4 (July 10, 2017) (granting certified question).”
Est. of Madsen v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue, 650 P.2d 196 (Wash. 1982). “In accordance with an order of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and pursuant to RCW 2.60.010(4), the parties have stipulated to the following facts: Mattias Arnold Madsen and Norma V.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 2.60.010(4)(b) — 4 cases
Convoyant LLC v. Deepthink LLC (W.D. Wash. 2022).
Brown v. Old Navy LLC (W.D. Wash. 2023).
Paddock v. PeaceHealth Inc (W.D. Wash. 2024).
Branson v. Washington Fine Wine & Spirits LLC (W.D. Wash. 2024).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 2.60.010(6) — 2 cases
Washington Water Power Co. v. Graybar Elec. Co., 774 P.2d 1199 (Wash. 1989). “See RCW 2.60.010(6), 2.60.020 (Supreme Court opinion should answer "the local law question submitted" by the federal court).”
In Re Elliott, 446 P.2d 347 (Wash. 1968). “” “Opinion” as that term is defined in RCW 2.60.010 (6) means “the written opinion of the supreme court of Washington.”
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.