Wash. Rev. Code » Title 3 · Chapter 3.34
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 3.34.010 (2026)

District judges—Number for each county

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
The minimum number of district judges to be elected in each county shall be: Adams, two; Asotin, one; Benton, five; Chelan, two; Clallam, two; Clark, six; Columbia, one; Cowlitz, three; Douglas, one; Ferry, one; Franklin, one; Garfield, one; Grant, three; Grays Harbor, two; Island, one; Jefferson, one; King, twenty-three in 2009, twenty-five in 2010, and twenty-six in 2011; Kitsap, four; Kittitas, two; Klickitat, two; Lewis, two; Lincoln, one; Mason, one; Okanogan, two; Pacific, two; Pend Oreille, one; Pierce, eleven; San Juan, one; Skagit, three; Skamania, one; Snohomish, nine; Spokane, eight; Stevens, one; Thurston, three; Wahkiakum, one; Walla Walla, two; Whatcom, two; Whitman, one; Yakima, four. This number may be increased only as provided in RCW 3.34.020.
[ 2024 c 103 s 1; 2023 c 5 s 1; 2015 3rd sp.s. c 25 s 1; 2011 c 43 s 1. Prior: 2009 c 86 s 1; 2009 c 26 s 1; 2008 c 63 s 1; 2005 c 91 s 1; 2003 c 97 s 1; 2002 c 138 s 1; 1998 c 64 s 1; 1995 c 168 s 1; 1994 c 111 s 1; 1991 c 354 s 1; 1989 c 227 s 6; 1987 c 202 s 111; 1975 1st ex.s. c 153 s 1; 1973 1st ex.s. c 14 s 1; 1971 ex.s. c 147 s 1; 1970 ex.s. c 23 s 1; 1969 ex.s. c 66 s 1; 1965 ex.s. c 110 s 5; 1961 c 299 s 10.]

Notes:

District judge position for Skagit county—2015 3rd sp.s. c 25: "The additional judicial position created by section 1 of this act in Skagit county becomes effective only if the county, through its duly constituted legislative authority, documents its approval of the additional position and its agreement that it will pay out of county funds, without reimbursement from the state, the expenses of the additional judicial position as provided by statute." [ 2015 3rd sp.s. c 25 s 2.]
District judge position for Clark county—2005 c 91: See note following RCW 3.34.025.
Effective date—2003 c 97: "This act is necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, or safety, or support of the state government and its existing public institutions, and takes effect immediately [May 7, 2003]." [ 2003 c 97 s 6.]
Effective date—1995 c 168: "This is act is necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, or safety, or support of the state government and its existing public institutions, and shall take effect immediately [May 1, 1995]." [ 1995 c 168 s 2.]
Intent—1989 c 227: See note following RCW 3.38.070.
Intent—1987 c 202: See note following RCW 2.04.190.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases, 1974–2007 · leading case: State v. Bd. of Yakima Cnty. Commissioners, 869 P.2d 56 (Wash. 1994).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Bd. of Yakima Cnty. Commissioners, 869 P.2d 56 (Wash. 1994). · cites it 42× “6 *454 Appellant Royal claimed that Yakima County is required by RCW 3.34.010 to have six district court judges and asked that his declaration of candidacy be accepted for the fifth position in the next election.”
Delaney v. Bd. of Spokane Cnty. Com'rs, 164 P.3d 1290 (Wash. 2007). · cites it 11× “FACTS ¶ 2 During the 2002 legislative session, Spokane senators cosponsored an amendment to RCW 3.34.010 increasing the number of full-time district court judges in Spokane County from 9 to 10.”
Delaney v. Spokane Cnty. Bd. of Commissioners, 161 Wash. 2d 249 (Wash. 2007). · cites it 11× “FACTS ¶2 During the 2002 legislative session, Spokane senators cosponsored an amendment to RCW 3.34.010 increasing the number of full-time district court judges in Spokane County from 9 to 10.”
Pac. Cnty. v. State, 529 P.2d 460 (Wash. 1974). · cites it 2× “RCW 3.34.010. “Justices of the peace — Number for each county.”
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.