Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 26.60.090 (2026)

Reciprocity

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

A legal union, other than a marriage, of two persons that was validly formed in another jurisdiction, and that is substantially equivalent to a domestic partnership under this chapter, shall be recognized as a valid domestic partnership in this state and shall be treated the same as a domestic partnership registered in this state regardless of whether it bears the name domestic partnership.

[ 2012 c 3 s 12 (Referendum Measure No. 74, approved November 6, 2012); 2011 c 9 s 1; 2009 c 521 s 72; 2008 c 6 s 1101.]

Notes:

Notice—2012 c 3: See note following RCW 26.04.010.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 2 cases, 2014–2019 · leading case: In re the Dom. P'ship of Walsh, 335 P.3d 984 (Wash. Ct. App. 2014).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

In re the Dom. P'ship of Walsh, 335 P.3d 984 (Wash. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 5× “Application of “Equity Relationship” Doctrine before 2008 ¶28 Walsh contends that Washington’s 2008 Domestic Partnership Act, chapter 26.60 RCW, did not extend community property rights to preexisting registered California domestic partnerships under the “equity relationship”…”

Jean Walsh, Respondent/cross-appellant v. Kathryn Reynolds, Appellant/cross-respondent (Wash. Ct. App. 2019). “In Walsh I, we held that the committed intimate relationship doctrine applied to property the parties had acquired in California because the “doctrine is a creature of common law, not statute,” so there was no need for Washington and California to have “substantially equivalent”…”

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.