Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 26.04.130 (2026)

Voidable marriages

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

When either party to a marriage shall be incapable of consenting thereto, for want of a sufficient understanding, or when the consent of either party shall be obtained by force or fraud, such marriage is voidable, but only at the suit of the party laboring under the disability, or upon whom the force or fraud is imposed.

[ 2024 c 10 s 2; Code 1881 s 2381; 1866 p 81 s 3; RRS s 8449.]

Notes:

Application—2024 c 10: See note following RCW 26.04.010.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 8 cases, 1952–2014 · leading case: Matter of Est. of Lint, 957 P.2d 755 (Wash. 1998).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Matter of Est. of Lint, 957 P.2d 755 (Wash. 1998). “In reaching that decision, this court relied on the provisions of RCW 26.04.130, a statute that is still in effect.”

Murphy v. Lint, 957 P.2d 755 (Wash. 1998). “In reaching that decision, this court relied on the provisions of RCW 26.04.130, a statute that is still in effect.”

In Re Est. of Romano, 246 P.2d 501 (Wash. 1952). · cites it 2× “Considering first the law of Washington, the applicable statute is RCW 26.04.130 (Rem. Rev. Stat., § 8449), reading as follows: “When either party to a marriage is incapable of consenting thereto for want of legal age or a sufficient understanding, or when the consent of either…”

Jones v. Minc, 462 P.2d 927 (Wash. 1969). · cites it 10× “2d 432 (1954), this court construed RCW 26.04.130, [2] dealing with voidable marriages, and a section of the Divorce Act of *385 1949, RCW 26.”

In re the Est. of Alsup, 327 P.3d 1266 (Wash. Ct. App. 2014). “¶44 RCW 26.04.130 provides: When either party to a marriage shall be incapable of consenting thereto, for want of legal age or a sufficient understanding, or when the consent of either party shall be obtained by force or fraud, such marriage is voidable, but only at the suit of…”

State v. Denton, 983 P.2d 693 (Wash. Ct. App. 1999). “The regulatory purpose cannot be enforced by “the radical process of rendering void and immoral a matrimonial union otherwise validly contracted and solemnized.” Feehley, 99 A.”

Saville v. Saville, 271 P.2d 432 (Wash. 1954). · cites it 7× “, § 8449 *795 (now RCW 26.04.130), facts might be shown justifying a court in annulling a marriage for fraud.”

Est. of Theodore Roosevelt Alsup (Wash. Ct. App. 2014). “RCW 26.04.130 provides: When either party to a marriage shall be incapable of consenting thereto, for want of legal age or a sufficient understanding, or when the consent of either party shall be obtained by force or fraud, such marriage is voidable, but only at the suit ofthe…”

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.