Wash. Rev. Code § 26.16.200
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov
JustiaTitle on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Neither person in a marriage or state registered domestic partnership is liable for the debts or liabilities of the other incurred before marriage or state registered domestic partnership, nor for the separate debts of each other, nor is the rent or income of the separate property of either liable for the separate debts of the other: PROVIDED, That the earnings and accumulations of the spouse or domestic partner shall be available to the legal process of creditors for the satisfaction of debts incurred by such spouse or domestic partner prior to the marriage or the state registered domestic partnership. For the purpose of this section, neither person in the marriage or the state registered domestic partnership shall be construed to have any interest in the earnings of the other: PROVIDED FURTHER, That no separate debt, except a child support or maintenance obligation, may be the basis of a claim against the earnings and accumulations of either spouse or either domestic partner unless the same is reduced to judgment within three years of the marriage or the state registered domestic partnership of the parties. The obligation of a parent or stepparent to support a child may be collected out of the parent's or stepparent's separate property, the parent's or stepparent's earnings and accumulations, and the parent's or stepparent's share of community personal and real property. Funds in a community bank account which can be identified as the earnings of the nonobligated spouse or nonobligated domestic partner are exempt from satisfaction of the child support obligation of the debtor spouse or debtor domestic partner.
[ 2008 c 6 s 617; 1983 1st ex.s. c 41 s 2; 1969 ex.s. c 121 s 1; Code 1881 s 2405; 1873 p 452 s 10; RRS s 6905.]
Notes:
Severability—1983 1st ex.s. c 41: See note following RCW 26.09.060.
Collection actions against community bank account: RCW 74.20A.120.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 36
cases (6 in the last 5 years), 1961–2026 · leading case: Haley v. Highland
Haley v. Highland (2000)
“On June 11, 1996, the trial court heard the motion and entered an order quashing the writ and finding that Highland's MAR judgment against Haley, as well as the $250 in terms was exempt from execution by reason of RCW 26.16.200. This statute provides that "[n]either husband or…”
Haley v. Highland (2000)
“On June 11, 1996, the trial court heard the motion and entered an order quashing the writ and finding that Highland’s MAR judgment against Haley, as well as the $250 in terms was exempt from execution by reason of RCW 26.16.200. This statute provides that “[n] either husband or…”
Nelson v. P.S.C., Inc. (2023)
“However, the statute contains an exception permitting creditors to reach a spouse’s “earnings and accumulations” to satisfy a separate debt where the creditor reduces that debt “to judgment within three years of the marriage.”
deElche v. Jacobsen (1980)
“There is no statutory authority in this state for the step taken by the court today, but the statutes regarding community property clearly contemplate a system in which community property is not, generally, subject to separate liability: Community real estate shall be subject .”
Van Dyke v. Thompson (1981)
“RCW 26.16.200, the so-called "marital bankruptcy" statute, was also amended in 1969.”
Sorenson v. Secretary of the Treasury of the United States (1982)
“The problem arises with the application of RCW § 26.16.200. The statute provides that: Neither husband or wife is liable for the debts or liabilities of the other incurred before marriage, nor for the separate debts of each other, nor is the rent or income of the separate…”
Pacific Gamble Robinson Co. v. Lapp (1980)
“030; RCW 26.16.200. In Colorado, however, as we explain more fully below, the law subjects only the husband's property, including earnings, to payment of a debt incurred by him alone.”
Caplan v. Sullivan (1984)
“*291 The issue presented by this appeal is whether a tortfeasor's community property earnings are subject to garnishment for a tort committed prior to marriage which was reduced to judgment within 3 years of the tortfeasor's marriage, under RCW 26.16.200. The answer depends on…”
Watters v. Doud (1979)
“The issues raised by the foregoing facts are: (1) whether RCW 26.16.200 should be read together with RCW 4.”
Ryan v. Diafos (2001)
“Then Diafos ceased making payments and Ryan received notice from Diafos’ counsel that Diafos intended to make no more payments because Diafos had now been married for three years and was invoking the protection of RCW 26.16.200. That statute provides that creditors may not reach…”
Casa Del Rey v. Hart (1982)
“In addition, under the provisions of RCW 26.16.200, 5 both Edward Grubbe's earnings and accumulations are subject to his child support obligation which was reduced to judgment within 3 years of Edward's marriage to Linda.”
State v. Coria (2002)
“Further, this court construed RCW 26.16.200, the “marital bankruptcy statute,” to provide that a spouse’s interest in community could be used to satisfy a judgment arising from a premarital tort.”
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.