Wash. Rev. Code » Title 26 · Chapter 26.27
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 26.27.231 (2026)

Temporary emergency jurisdiction

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(1) A court of this state has temporary emergency jurisdiction if the child is present in this state and the child has been abandoned or it is necessary in an emergency to protect the child because the child, or a sibling or parent of the child, is subjected to or threatened with abuse.
(2) If there is no previous child custody determination that is entitled to be enforced under this chapter and a child custody proceeding has not been commenced in a court of a state having jurisdiction under RCW 26.27.201 through 26.27.221, a child custody determination made under this section remains in effect until an order is obtained from a court of a state having jurisdiction under RCW 26.27.201 through 26.27.221. If a child custody proceeding has not been or is not commenced in a court of a state having jurisdiction under RCW 26.27.201 through 26.27.221, a child custody determination made under this section becomes a final determination, if it so provides and this state becomes the home state of the child.
(3) If there is a previous child custody determination that is entitled to be enforced under this chapter, or a child custody proceeding has been commenced in a court of a state having jurisdiction under RCW 26.27.201 through 26.27.221, any order issued by a court of this state under this section must specify in the order a period that the court considers adequate to allow the person seeking an order to obtain an order from the state having jurisdiction under RCW 26.27.201 through 26.27.221. The order issued in this state remains in effect until an order is obtained from the other state within the period specified or the period expires.
(4) A court of this state that has been asked to make a child custody determination under this section, upon being informed that a child custody proceeding has been commenced in, or a child custody determination has been made by, a court of a state having jurisdiction under RCW 26.27.201 through 26.27.221, shall immediately communicate with the other court. A court of this state that is exercising jurisdiction pursuant to RCW 26.27.201 through 26.27.221, upon being informed that a child custody proceeding has been commenced in, or a child custody determination has been made by, a court of another state under a statute similar to this section shall immediately communicate with the court of that state to resolve the emergency, protect the safety of the parties and the child, and determine a period for the duration of the temporary order.
[ 2001 c 65 s 204.]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 13 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2009–2023 · leading case: Ruff v. Knickerbocker, 275 P.3d 1175 (Wash. Ct. App. 2012).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Ruff v. Knickerbocker, 275 P.3d 1175 (Wash. Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 30× “See RCW 26.27.231, .201(1)(b), (c), .221. ¶ 10 Ms.”
In re the Marriage of McDermott, 307 P.3d 717 (Wash. Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 8× “201(1)(a)-(d). As relevant here, a Washington court may properly exercise jurisdiction pursuant to RCW 26.”
In Re Custody of AC, 200 P.3d 689 (Wash. 2009). “¶ 8 The UCCJEA provides, in pertinent part: Except as otherwise provided in RCW 26.27.231, a court of this state may not modify a child custody determination made by a court of another state unless a court of this state has jurisdiction to make an initial determination under RCW…”
Nagel v. Cork, 165 Wash. 2d 568 (Wash. 2009). “¶8 The UCCJEA provides, in pertinent part: Except as otherwise provided in RCW 26.27.231, a court of this state may not modify a child custody determination made by a court of another state unless a court of this state has jurisdiction to make an initial determination under RCW…”
Wendy A. Mcdermott, App. v. Justin J. Mcdermott, Resp. (Wash. Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 9× “201 provides in relevant part: (1) Except as otherwise provided in RCW26.27.231, a court of this state has jurisdiction to make an initial child custody determination only if: (a) This state is the home state of the child on the date of the commencement of the proceeding, or was…”
Stacy R. Clifford v. Douglas R. Clifford (Wash. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 4× “231(2) provides that a court’s temporary emergency jurisdiction continues, and its child custody determinations remain in effect “[i]f there is no previous child custody determination that is entitled to be enforced under this chapter and a child custody proceeding has not been…”
In Re The Marriage Of Tomi L Ingersoll v. John P Ingersoll (Wash. Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 4× “See RCW 26.27.231; AS 25.30.330. Therefore, the superior court did not abuse its discretion by determining that Winters was unable to comply with the parenting plan due to OCS’s instructions to Winters and the temporary orders entered by the Alaska superior court.”
In Re The Marriage Of Tomi L Ingersoll v. John P Ingersoll (Wash. Ct. App. 2020). · cites it 4× “The Alaska court had asserted jurisdiction under the temporary emergency jurisdiction provision of the UCCJEA, RCW 26.27.231. And the Alaska court requested the conference with the Washington court.”
Brandee Mayton v. Peter Coneway (Wash. Ct. App. 2020). · cites it 3× “The UCCJEA defines “modification” as “a child custody determination that changes, replaces, supersedes, or is otherwise made after a previous 7 A Washington court can modify a child custody determination made by a court of another state as follows: Except as otherwise provided…”
In the Matter of the Marriage of: Bethany Alhaidari & Ghassan Abdulrahman Alhaidari (Wash. Ct. App. 2023). · cites it 3× “On February 20, 2020, the superior court ruled that it possessed temporary emergency jurisdiction under RCW 26.27.231 and entered an order granting temporary custody to Bethany.”
Christien Freeman v. Steven Wallace (Wash. Ct. App. 2017). “30 RCW 26.27.231; TENN. CODE ANN. 36-6-219(b).”
Charles Alec Winton v. Rita Cagliostro (Wash. Ct. App. 2018). “8 The brief makes no mention of personal jurisdiction, and while Cagliostro mentions the UCCJA's section on "Temporary emergency jurisdiction," RCW 26.27.231(1), she mentions it in the context of matters involving the Oregon courts, not the King County Superior Court.”
Show all 13 citing cases →
— Wash. Rev. Code § 26.27.231(1) — 3 cases
Ruff v. Knickerbocker, 275 P.3d 1175 (Wash. Ct. App. 2012). “See RCW 26.27.231, .201(1)(b), (c), .221. ¶ 10 Ms.”
Brandee Mayton v. Peter Coneway (Wash. Ct. App. 2020). “The UCCJEA defines “modification” as “a child custody determination that changes, replaces, supersedes, or is otherwise made after a previous 7 A Washington court can modify a child custody determination made by a court of another state as follows: Except as otherwise provided…”
Charles Alec Winton v. Rita Cagliostro (Wash. Ct. App. 2018). “8 The brief makes no mention of personal jurisdiction, and while Cagliostro mentions the UCCJA's section on "Temporary emergency jurisdiction," RCW 26.27.231(1), she mentions it in the context of matters involving the Oregon courts, not the King County Superior Court.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 26.27.231(2) — 3 cases
In re the Marriage of McDermott, 307 P.3d 717 (Wash. Ct. App. 2013). “201(1)(a)-(d). As relevant here, a Washington court may properly exercise jurisdiction pursuant to RCW 26.”
Stacy R. Clifford v. Douglas R. Clifford (Wash. Ct. App. 2018). “231(2) provides that a court’s temporary emergency jurisdiction continues, and its child custody determinations remain in effect “[i]f there is no previous child custody determination that is entitled to be enforced under this chapter and a child custody proceeding has not been…”
Wendy A. Mcdermott, App. v. Justin J. Mcdermott, Resp. (Wash. Ct. App. 2013). “201 provides in relevant part: (1) Except as otherwise provided in RCW26.27.231, a court of this state has jurisdiction to make an initial child custody determination only if: (a) This state is the home state of the child on the date of the commencement of the proceeding, or was…”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 26.27.231(3) — 3 cases
Ruff v. Knickerbocker, 275 P.3d 1175 (Wash. Ct. App. 2012). “See RCW 26.27.231, .201(1)(b), (c), .221. ¶ 10 Ms.”
In re the Marriage of McDermott, 307 P.3d 717 (Wash. Ct. App. 2013). “201(1)(a)-(d). As relevant here, a Washington court may properly exercise jurisdiction pursuant to RCW 26.”
Wendy A. Mcdermott, App. v. Justin J. Mcdermott, Resp. (Wash. Ct. App. 2013). “201 provides in relevant part: (1) Except as otherwise provided in RCW26.27.231, a court of this state has jurisdiction to make an initial child custody determination only if: (a) This state is the home state of the child on the date of the commencement of the proceeding, or was…”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 26.27.231(4) — 5 cases
Ruff v. Knickerbocker, 275 P.3d 1175 (Wash. Ct. App. 2012). “See RCW 26.27.231, .201(1)(b), (c), .221. ¶ 10 Ms.”
In re the Marriage of McDermott, 307 P.3d 717 (Wash. Ct. App. 2013). “201(1)(a)-(d). As relevant here, a Washington court may properly exercise jurisdiction pursuant to RCW 26.”
Wendy A. Mcdermott, App. v. Justin J. Mcdermott, Resp. (Wash. Ct. App. 2013). “201 provides in relevant part: (1) Except as otherwise provided in RCW26.27.231, a court of this state has jurisdiction to make an initial child custody determination only if: (a) This state is the home state of the child on the date of the commencement of the proceeding, or was…”
In Re The Marriage Of Tomi L Ingersoll v. John P Ingersoll (Wash. Ct. App. 2019). “See RCW 26.27.231; AS 25.30.330. Therefore, the superior court did not abuse its discretion by determining that Winters was unable to comply with the parenting plan due to OCS’s instructions to Winters and the temporary orders entered by the Alaska superior court.”
In Re The Marriage Of Tomi L Ingersoll v. John P Ingersoll (Wash. Ct. App. 2020). “The Alaska court had asserted jurisdiction under the temporary emergency jurisdiction provision of the UCCJEA, RCW 26.27.231. And the Alaska court requested the conference with the Washington court.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 26.27.231(d) — 2 cases
In Re The Marriage Of Tomi L Ingersoll v. John P Ingersoll (Wash. Ct. App. 2019). “See RCW 26.27.231; AS 25.30.330. Therefore, the superior court did not abuse its discretion by determining that Winters was unable to comply with the parenting plan due to OCS’s instructions to Winters and the temporary orders entered by the Alaska superior court.”
In Re The Marriage Of Tomi L Ingersoll v. John P Ingersoll (Wash. Ct. App. 2020). “The Alaska court had asserted jurisdiction under the temporary emergency jurisdiction provision of the UCCJEA, RCW 26.27.231. And the Alaska court requested the conference with the Washington court.”
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.