Wash. Rev. Code » Title 28B · Chapter 28B.10
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 28B.10.528 (2026)

Delegation of powers and duties by governing boards

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
The governing boards of institutions of higher education shall have power, when exercised by resolution, to delegate to the president or his or her designee, of their respective university or college, any of the powers and duties vested in or imposed upon such governing board by law. Delegated powers and duties may be exercised in the name of the respective governing boards.
[ 2011 c 336 s 712; 1971 ex.s. c 57 s 21.]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases, 1974–2020 · leading case: Cathcart v. Andersen, 530 P.2d 313 (Wash. 1975).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Cathcart v. Andersen, 530 P.2d 313 (Wash. 1975). · cites it 3× “In 1971, RCW 28B.10.528 was enacted which expressly allowed the board of regents to delegate and sub-delegate authority from the board to the president or the designee of the president.”
McDonald v. Hogness, 598 P.2d 707 (Wash. 1979). · cites it 2× “Under RCW 28B.10.528, the regents are authorized to delegate to the university president or his designee any of their powers and duties.”
Cathcart v. Andersen, 517 P.2d 980 (Wash. Ct. App. 1974). “RCW 28B.10.528. Chapter 1, § 2 of the Standing Orders of the University of Washington reads as follows: 2.”
McNiece v. Washington State Univ., 871 P.2d 649 (Wash. Ct. App. 1994). · cites it 10× “In this case, however, the facts are not disputed; at issue is the meaning of a statute, RCW 28B.10.528. While the HEPB’s interpretation of the statute is not binding on this court, we do accord substantial weight to its interpretation.”
Bruce L. Davidson, M.d. v. Robb W. Glenny, M.d., Et Ano., 470 P.3d 549 (Wash. Ct. App. 2020). “130(2) grants the Board of Regents authority to employ “members of the faculty, and employees of the institution, who .”
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.