Wash. Rev. Code » Title 26 · Chapter 26.21A
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 26.21A.100 (2026)

Bases for jurisdiction over nonresident

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(1) In a proceeding to establish or enforce a support order or to determine parentage of a child, a tribunal of this state may exercise personal jurisdiction over a nonresident individual or the individual's guardian or conservator if:
(a) The individual is personally served with a citation, summons, or notice within this state;
(b) The individual submits to the jurisdiction of this state by consent in a record, by entering a general appearance, or by filing a responsive document having the effect of waiving any contest to personal jurisdiction;
(c) The individual resided with the child in this state;
(d) The individual resided in this state and provided prenatal expenses or support for the child;
(e) The child resides in this state as a result of the acts or directives of the individual;
(f) The individual engaged in sexual intercourse in this state and the child may have been conceived by that act of intercourse; or
(g) There is any other basis consistent with the constitutions of this state and the United States for the exercise of personal jurisdiction.
(2) The bases of personal jurisdiction set forth in subsection (1) of this section or in any other law of this state may not be used to acquire personal jurisdiction for a tribunal of this state to modify a child support order of another state unless the requirements of RCW 26.21A.550 are met, or, in the case of a foreign support order, unless the requirements of RCW 26.21A.570 are met.
[ 2015 c 214 s 4; 2002 c 198 s 201.]

Notes:

Effective date—Conflict with federal requirements—Waiver—2015 c 214: See notes following RCW 26.21A.010.
Denial of waiver—2015 c 214: See note following RCW 26.21A.115.
Effective date—2002 c 198: See RCW 26.21A.900.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2011–2024 · leading case: In re the Marriage of Schneider, 268 P.3d 215 (Wash. 2011).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
In re the Marriage of Schneider, 268 P.3d 215 (Wash. 2011). “Here, the father waived his objection to personal jurisdiction when he failed I to timely object to the entry of the 2007 order. ¶19 In contrast to 2007, the father did more than enter a general appearance in the 2009 modification proceeding; he sought affirmative relief by…”
In Re The Parentage Of B.c.: George Chapman, App v. State Of Washington, Resps (Wash. Ct. App. 2020). “, of the parentage of a child if the court acts under circumstances that satisfy the jurisdictional requirements of RCW 26.21A.100, and the final order [e]xpressly identifies a child as a ‘child of the marriage,’~[or] ‘issue of the marriage,’ .”
In Re Emmalee Bonner, V. Travis Gerrard (Wash. Ct. App. 2024). “RCW 26.21A.100 extends personal jurisdiction if, in order to enforce a support order, “[t]he individual is personally served with a citation, summons, or notice within this state[,] .”
In Re The Marriage Of: Simon Pedersen v. Lone Pedersen (Wash. Ct. App. 2014). “30 Because both Simon and Lone resided with Nora in Washington, the superior court may exercise personal jurisdiction over either or both of them as nonresidents under RCW 26.21A.100(c). Alternatively, under RCW 26.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 26.21A.100(2) — 1 case
In re the Marriage of Schneider, 268 P.3d 215 (Wash. 2011). “Here, the father waived his objection to personal jurisdiction when he failed I to timely object to the entry of the 2007 order. ¶19 In contrast to 2007, the father did more than enter a general appearance in the 2009 modification proceeding; he sought affirmative relief by…”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 26.21A.100(c) — 1 case
In Re The Marriage Of: Simon Pedersen v. Lone Pedersen (Wash. Ct. App. 2014). “30 Because both Simon and Lone resided with Nora in Washington, the superior court may exercise personal jurisdiction over either or both of them as nonresidents under RCW 26.21A.100(c). Alternatively, under 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.