Wash. Rev. Code » Title 26 · Chapter 26.60
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 26.60.015 (2026)

Intent

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
It is the intent of the legislature that for all purposes under state law, state registered domestic partners shall be treated the same as married spouses. Any privilege, immunity, right, benefit, or responsibility granted or imposed by statute, administrative or court rule, policy, common law or any other law to an individual because the individual is or was a spouse, or because the individual is or was an in-law in a specified way to another individual, is granted on equivalent terms, substantive and procedural, to an individual because the individual is or was in a state registered domestic partnership or because the individual is or was, based on a state registered domestic partnership, related in a specified way to another individual. The provisions of chapter 521, Laws of 2009 shall be liberally construed to achieve equal treatment, to the extent not in conflict with federal law, of state registered domestic partners and married spouses.
[ 2009 c 521 s 1.]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2013–2025 · leading case: Holt v. Holt, 315 P.3d 470 (Wash. 2013).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Holt v. Holt, 315 P.3d 470 (Wash. 2013). “521, § 1 (codified at RCW 26.60.015). This 2009 domestic partnership enactment was then submitted to the people in Referendum Measure 71, which was placed on the ballot and approved by voters at the November 3, 2009 general election.”
Donald Muridan v. Nicole M. Redl, 413 P.3d 1072 (Wash. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 2× “” RCW 26.60.015. 2 49436-1-II For the first eight months of cohabitation, Redl paid Muridan $800 per month in rent.”
In the Matter of the Committed Intimate Relationship of: Elizabeth York & David Donovick (Wash. Ct. App. 2025). “010; RCW 26.60.015. Although superior courts generally have the power to hear and determine all matters, because these relationships are governed by statute, a superior court lacks jurisdiction over the dissolution of such relationships unless 8 No.”
In re Custody of B.M.H. (Wash. 2013). “521, § 1 (codified at RCW 26.60.015). This 2009 domestic partnership enactment was then submitted to the people in Referendum Measure 71, which was placed on the ballot and approved by voters at the November 3, 2009 general election.”
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.