Revised Code of Washington
Wash. Rev. Code § 26.09.490 (2026)
Required provision in residential orders
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov
JustiaTitle on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4
cases, 2003–2009 · leading case: Osborne v. Osborne, 79 P.3d 465 (Wash. Ct. App. 2003).
Osborne v. Osborne, 79 P.3d 465 (Wash. Ct. App. 2003). “The agreed parenting plan specifically referenced Washington’s child relocation act, and contained the provisions required to be included in parenting plans by RCW 26.09.490. A year and a day later, on March 6, 2002, Tawnya filed notice of intent to relocate with Celeste, along…”
In Re Custody of Osborne, 79 P.3d 465 (Wash. Ct. App. 2003). “The agreed parenting plan specifically referenced Washington's Child Relocation Act, and contained the provisions required to *468 be included in parenting plans by RCW 26.09.490. A year and a day later, on March 6, 2002, Tawnya filed notice of intent to relocate with Celeste,…”
In re the Marriage of Chua, 149 Wash. App. 147 (Wash. Ct. App. 2009). “Chua points out that RCW 26.09.490 states that “[u]nless waived by court order, after June 8, 2000, every court order shall include a clear restatement of the provisions in RCW 26.”
In Re Marriage of Chua & Root, 202 P.3d 367 (Wash. Ct. App. 2009). “Chua points out that RCW 26.09.490 states that: "Unless waived by court order, after June 8, 2000, every court order shall include a clear restatement of the provisions in RCW 26.”
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.