Wash. Rev. Code » Title 26 · Chapter 26.44
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 26.44.060 (2026)

✓ 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) Except as provided in (b) of this subsection, any person participating in good faith in the making of a report pursuant to this chapter, testifying as to alleged child abuse or neglect in a judicial proceeding, or otherwise providing information or assistance, including medical evaluations or consultations, in connection with a report, investigation, or legal intervention pursuant to a good faith report of child abuse or neglect shall in so doing be immune from any civil or criminal liability arising out of such reporting or testifying under any law of this state or its political subdivisions.
(b) A person convicted of a violation of subsection (4) of this section shall not be immune from liability under (a) of this subsection.
(2) An administrator of a hospital or similar institution or any physician licensed pursuant to chapters 18.71 or 18.57 RCW taking a child into custody pursuant to RCW 26.44.056 shall not be subject to criminal or civil liability for such taking into custody.
(3) Conduct conforming with the reporting requirements of this chapter shall not be deemed a violation of the confidential communication privilege of RCW 5.60.060 (3) and (4), 18.53.200 and 18.83.110. Nothing in this chapter shall be construed as to supersede or abridge remedies provided in chapter 4.92 RCW.
(4) A person who, intentionally and in bad faith, knowingly makes a false report of alleged abuse or neglect shall be guilty of a misdemeanor punishable in accordance with RCW 9A.20.021.
(5) A person who, in good faith and without gross negligence, cooperates in an investigation arising as a result of a report made pursuant to this chapter, shall not be subject to civil liability arising out of his or her cooperation. This subsection does not apply to a person who caused or allowed the child abuse or neglect to occur.
[ 2020 c 71 s 2; 2007 c 118 s 1; 2004 c 37 s 1; 1997 c 386 s 29; 1988 c 142 s 3; 1982 c 129 s 9; 1975 1st ex.s. c 217 s 6; 1965 c 13 s 6.]

Notes:

Application—Effective date—1997 c 386: See notes following RCW 13.50.010.
Severability—1982 c 129: See note following RCW 9A.04.080.
Nurse-patient privilege subject to RCW 26.44.060(3): RCW 5.62.030.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 49 cases (10 in the last 5 years), 1975–2024 · leading case: Lesley v. Dep't of Soc. & Health Servs., 921 P.2d 1066 (Wash. Ct. App. 1996).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Lesley v. Dep't of Soc. & Health Servs., 921 P.2d 1066 (Wash. Ct. App. 1996). · cites it 8× “oyees enjoy qualified statutory immunity for reporting child abuse: (l)(a) Except as provided in (b) of this subsection, any person participating in good faith in the making of a report pursuant to this chapter or testifying as to alleged child abuse *274 or neglect in a…”
Dunning v. Paccerelli, 818 P.2d 34 (Wash. Ct. App. 1991). · cites it 7× “The defendants next assert they are immune from liability pursuant to former RCW 26.44.060. The Legislature specifically provided: (1) Any person participating in good faith in the making of a report pursuant to this chapter .”
Babcock v. State, 809 P.2d 143 (Wash. 1991). · cites it 4× “056(3); RCW 26.44.060(1). [29] See, e.g., Coverdell v.”
Whaley v. State, 956 P.2d 1100 (Wash. Ct. App. 1998). · cites it 5× ““We have had many families come to our clinic for assessment of their children’s academic abilities and ability to communicate after great ‘breakthroughs’ have been experienced through the use of facilitated communication.”
Savage v. State, 899 P.2d 1270 (Wash. 1995). · cites it 4× “The Court of Appeals distinguished Babcock on the ground the result in that case was compelled by a provision in the statute at issue, RCW 26.44.060(3), which provides that nothing in the chapter shall be construed to abridge or supersede the remedies provided by the legislative…”
Yuille v. State, 45 P.3d 1107 (Wash. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 4× “RCW 26.44.060(1)(a). This second issue is dispositive for us.”
Waller v. State, 824 P.2d 1225 (Wash. Ct. App. 1992). · cites it 3× “With respect to civil liability in cases of child abuse or neglect, RCW 26.44.060 reads in pertinent part: (1) (a) .”
Kim v. Lakeside Adult Fam. Home, 374 P.3d 121 (Wash. 2016). “Id/, RCW 26.44.060(5). The court reasoned, “ A grant of immunity from liability clearly implies that civil liability can exist in the first place.”
Burkhart v. Harrod, 755 P.2d 759 (Wash. 1988). · cites it 2× “Reporters of child abuse are immune from suit under RCW 26.44.060. This court grants immunity to parties and counsel for allegedly libelous statements made in the course of judicial proceedings based on a public policy of granting them utmost freedom to secure justice.”
Doe v. Corp. of President of Lds Church, 167 P.3d 1193 (Wash. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 2× “" RCW 26.44.060(5). However, "[t]his subsection does not apply to a person who caused or allowed the child abuse or neglect to occur.”
Doe v. Corp. of the President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, 141 Wash. App. 407 (Wash. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 2× “” RCW 26.44.060(5). However, “[t]his subsection does not apply to a person who caused or allowed the child abuse or neglect to occur.”
CJC v. Corp. of Catholic Bishop, 985 P.2d 262 (Wash. 1999). “RCW 26.44.060(1)(a). [16] We, therefore, conclude the Church and Schulz owed a duty of reasonable care to affirmatively act to prevent the harm, in view of their relationship to the plaintiffs, their relationship to Wilson, and given the knowledge they allegedly possessed.”
Show all 49 citing cases →
— Wash. Rev. Code § 26.44.060(1) — 13 cases
Lesley v. Dep't of Soc. & Health Servs., 921 P.2d 1066 (Wash. Ct. App. 1996). “oyees enjoy qualified statutory immunity for reporting child abuse: (l)(a) Except as provided in (b) of this subsection, any person participating in good faith in the making of a report pursuant to this chapter or testifying as to alleged child abuse *274 or neglect in a…”
Babcock v. State, 809 P.2d 143 (Wash. 1991). “056(3); RCW 26.44.060(1). [29] See, e.g., Coverdell v.”
Dunning v. Paccerelli, 818 P.2d 34 (Wash. Ct. App. 1991). “The defendants next assert they are immune from liability pursuant to former RCW 26.44.060. The Legislature specifically provided: (1) Any person participating in good faith in the making of a report pursuant to this chapter .”
State v. Glenn, 62 P.3d 921 (Wash. Ct. App. 2003).
State v. Glenn, 115 Wash. App. 540 (Wash. Ct. App. 2003).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 26.44.060(1)(a) — 12 cases
Yuille v. State, 45 P.3d 1107 (Wash. Ct. App. 2002). “RCW 26.44.060(1)(a). This second issue is dispositive for us.”
CJC v. Corp. of Catholic Bishop, 985 P.2d 262 (Wash. 1999). “RCW 26.44.060(1)(a). [16] We, therefore, conclude the Church and Schulz owed a duty of reasonable care to affirmatively act to prevent the harm, in view of their relationship to the plaintiffs, their relationship to Wilson, and given the knowledge they allegedly possessed.”
Miles v. Child Prot. Servs. Dept., 6 P.3d 112 (Wash. Ct. App. 2000).
Miles v. Child Prot. Servs. Dep't, 102 Wash. App. 142 (Wash. Ct. App. 2000).
Yuille v. DSHA, 45 P.3d 1107 (Wash. Ct. App. 2002).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 26.44.060(1)(b) — 2 cases
Russell Carter, V. Multicare Health Sys. (Wash. Ct. App. 2024).
Grae-El v. City of Seattle (W.D. Wash. 2022).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 26.44.060(2) — 1 case
Miles v. Child Prot. Servs. Dep't, 102 Wash. App. 142 (Wash. Ct. App. 2000).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 26.44.060(2)(a) — 1 case
Miles v. Child Prot. Servs. Dept., 6 P.3d 112 (Wash. Ct. App. 2000).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 26.44.060(3) — 5 cases
Savage v. State, 899 P.2d 1270 (Wash. 1995). “The Court of Appeals distinguished Babcock on the ground the result in that case was compelled by a provision in the statute at issue, RCW 26.44.060(3), which provides that nothing in the chapter shall be construed to abridge or supersede the remedies provided by the legislative…”
Babcock v. State, 809 P.2d 143 (Wash. 1991). “056(3); RCW 26.44.060(1). [29] See, e.g., Coverdell v.”
Dunning v. Paccerelli, 818 P.2d 34 (Wash. Ct. App. 1991). “The defendants next assert they are immune from liability pursuant to former RCW 26.44.060. The Legislature specifically provided: (1) Any person participating in good faith in the making of a report pursuant to this chapter .”
Savage v. State, 864 P.2d 1009 (Wash. Ct. App. 1994).
A.B., J.L., V. Kiwanis Int'l (Wash. Ct. App. 2024).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 26.44.060(4) — 2 cases
Whaley v. State, 956 P.2d 1100 (Wash. Ct. App. 1998). ““We have had many families come to our clinic for assessment of their children’s academic abilities and ability to communicate after great ‘breakthroughs’ have been experienced through the use of facilitated communication.”
Russell Carter, V. Multicare Health Sys. (Wash. Ct. App. 2024).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 26.44.060(5) — 8 cases
Kim v. Lakeside Adult Fam. Home, 374 P.3d 121 (Wash. 2016). “Id/, RCW 26.44.060(5). The court reasoned, “ A grant of immunity from liability clearly implies that civil liability can exist in the first place.”
Doe v. Corp. of President of Lds Church, 167 P.3d 1193 (Wash. Ct. App. 2007). “" RCW 26.44.060(5). However, "[t]his subsection does not apply to a person who caused or allowed the child abuse or neglect to occur.”
Doe v. Corp. of the President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, 141 Wash. App. 407 (Wash. Ct. App. 2007). “” RCW 26.44.060(5). However, “[t]his subsection does not apply to a person who caused or allowed the child abuse or neglect to occur.”
Beggs v. Dep't of Soc. & Health Servs., 171 Wash. 2d 69 (Wash. 2011).
Kim v. Lakeside Adult Fam. Home (Wash. 2016).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 26.44.060(a)(1) — 1 case
Hartman v. State of Washington Dep't of Child. Youth & Families (W.D. Wash. 2024).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 26.44.060(l)(a) — 6 cases
Whaley v. State, 956 P.2d 1100 (Wash. Ct. App. 1998). ““We have had many families come to our clinic for assessment of their children’s academic abilities and ability to communicate after great ‘breakthroughs’ have been experienced through the use of facilitated communication.”
C.J.C. v. Corp. of Catholic Bishop, 138 Wash. 2d 699 (Wash. 1999).
Yuille v. State, 45 P.3d 1107 (Wash. Ct. App. 2002). “RCW 26.44.060(1)(a). This second issue is dispositive for us.”
Lesley v. Dep't of Soc. & Health Servs., 921 P.2d 1066 (Wash. Ct. App. 1996). “oyees enjoy qualified statutory immunity for reporting child abuse: (l)(a) Except as provided in (b) of this subsection, any person participating in good faith in the making of a report pursuant to this chapter or testifying as to alleged child abuse *274 or neglect in a…”
Childs v. Allen, 105 P.3d 411 (Wash. Ct. App. 2004).
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.