Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 26.04.140 (2026)

Marriage license

✓ current as of May 2026

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

Before any persons can be joined in marriage, they shall procure a license from a county auditor, as provided in RCW 26.04.150 through 26.04.190.

[ 1985 c 82 s 1; 1939 c 204 s 2; RRS s 8450-1. Prior: Code 1881 s 2390; 1866 p 83 s 12.]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 5 cases, 1999–2018 · leading case: Heinsma v. City of Vancouver, 144 Wash. 2d 556 (Wash. 2001).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Heinsma v. City of Vancouver, 144 Wash. 2d 556 (Wash. 2001). “See RCW 26.04.140. For example, the trial court noted that “a domestic partner as qualified by the city would not be entitled to Social Security benefits; would not be required to join on any real estate transactions; or be liable for the debts incurred by their partner.”

Heinsma v. City of Vancouver, 29 P.3d 709 (Wash. 2001). “In addition, domestic partners may terminate their relationship by simply filing a termination statement whereas a married couple must enter into divorce proceedings.”

State v. Denton, 983 P.2d 693 (Wash. Ct. App. 1999). “” RCW 26.04.140. But Washington does not have a statute plainly making an unlicensed marriage invalid.”

Alonso Veliz v. Dep't of Labor & Indus. (Wash. Ct. App. 2017). “RCW 26.04.140, .180. The person solemnizing the ceremony is required to file a certificate with the county auditor.”

In re the Marriage of: Jennifer Lynn Wadlow & Robert Blaine Wadlow (Wash. Ct. App. 2018). “Wadlow wrote: [RCW 26.04.140] is one basis specified in the motion for attorney fees denied January 31st, 2017.”

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.