Wash. Rev. Code » Title 3 · Chapter 3.66
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 3.66.010 (2026)

Powers of district court

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(1) The justices of the peace elected in accordance with chapters 3.30 through 3.74 RCW are authorized to hold court as judges of the district court for the trial of all actions enumerated in chapters 3.30 through 3.74 RCW or assigned to the district court by law; to hear, try, and determine the same according to the law, and for that purpose where no special provision is otherwise made by law, such court shall be vested with all the necessary powers which are possessed by courts of record in this state; and all laws of a general nature shall apply to such district court as far as the same may be applicable and not inconsistent with the provisions of chapters 3.30 through 3.74 RCW. The district court shall, upon the demand of either party, impanel a jury to try any civil or criminal case in accordance with the provisions of chapter 12.12 RCW. No jury trial may be held in a proceeding involving a traffic infraction.
(2) A district court participating in the program established by the administrative office of the courts pursuant to RCW 2.56.160 shall have jurisdiction to take recognizance, approve bail, and arraign defendants held within its jurisdiction on warrants issued by any other court of limited jurisdiction participating in the program.
[ 2005 c 282 s 15; 2000 c 111 s 2; 1984 c 258 s 40; 1979 ex.s. c 136 s 20; 1961 c 299 s 112.]

Notes:

Court Improvement Act of 1984—Effective dates—Severability—Short title—1984 c 258: See notes following RCW 3.30.010.
Effective date—Severability—1979 ex.s. c 136: See notes following RCW 46.63.010.
Powers and jurisdiction of district court commissioner: RCW 3.42.020.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 19 cases, 1964–2015 · leading case: Nollette v. Christianson, 800 P.2d 359 (Wash. 1990).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Nollette v. Christianson, 800 P.2d 359 (Wash. 1990). · cites it 7× “Nollette, however, also argues that under RCW 3.66.010, as a district court judge, he is authorized to sit as a municipal court judge.”
Strenge v. Clarke, 569 P.2d 60 (Wash. 1977). · cites it 4× “" RCW 3.66.010 gives justice courts "all the necessary powers which are possessed by courts of record in this state .”
City of Seattle v. Fuller, 300 P.3d 340 (Wash. 2013). · cites it 7× “In Wicklund , this court analyzed whether RCW 3.66.010 granted courts of limited jurisdiction the authority to continue a proceeding to determine competency under RCW 10.”
State v. Oakley, 72 P.3d 1114 (Wash. Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 6× “050 likewise provides that in district court trials, "the defendant or the state may demand a jury[.]" The trial court construed this language to mean that the court should only honor the State's jury demand if the defendant consents.”
State v. Wicklund, 638 P.2d 1241 (Wash. 1982). · cites it 2× “77 are made applicable to courts of limited jurisdiction by means of RCW 3.66.010, which provides in pertinent part: The justices of the peace elected in accordance with chapters 3.”
State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Avery, 57 P.3d 300 (Wash. Ct. App. 2002). “RCW 3.66.010(1). The small claims court possesses all inherent powers that are "essential to its existence and the due administration of justice.”
State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. v. Avery, 57 P.3d 300 (Wash. Ct. App. 2002). “RCW 3.66.010(1). The small claims court possesses all inherent powers that are “essential to its existence and the due administration of justice.”
City of Pasco v. MacE, 653 P.2d 618 (Wash. 1983). “280; RCW 3.66.010; RCW 35.22.460; RCW 35.23.600; RCW 35.”
Avlonitis v. Seattle Dist. Court, 646 P.2d 128 (Wash. 1982). “For this answer RCW 3.66.010 (effective until July 1, 1980) directs us to the laws governing courts of record.”
State v. Oakley, 117 Wash. App. 730 (Wash. Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 6× “050 likewise provides that in district court trials, “the defendant or the state may demand a jury .”
State Ex Rel. Farmer v. Edmonds Mun. Court, 621 P.2d 171 (Wash. Ct. App. 1980). “Compare RCW 3.66.010 with RCW 35A.20.040. The issue presented is whether optional municipal code cities situated in district court counties may forego the provisions of the 1961 justice court act and elect to create a police court pursuant to RCW 35A.”
State Of Washington v. David E. Bliss, 365 P.3d 764 (Wash. Ct. App. 2015). “4 See also RCW 3.66.010(1), which provides, The justices of the peace elected in accordance with chapters 3.”
Show all 19 citing cases →
— Wash. Rev. Code § 3.66.010(1) — 5 cases
State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Avery, 57 P.3d 300 (Wash. Ct. App. 2002). “RCW 3.66.010(1). The small claims court possesses all inherent powers that are "essential to its existence and the due administration of justice.”
State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. v. Avery, 57 P.3d 300 (Wash. Ct. App. 2002). “RCW 3.66.010(1). The small claims court possesses all inherent powers that are “essential to its existence and the due administration of justice.”
City of Seattle v. Fuller, 300 P.3d 340 (Wash. 2013). “In Wicklund , this court analyzed whether RCW 3.66.010 granted courts of limited jurisdiction the authority to continue a proceeding to determine competency under RCW 10.”
State Of Washington v. David E. Bliss, 365 P.3d 764 (Wash. Ct. App. 2015). “4 See also RCW 3.66.010(1), which provides, The justices of the peace elected in accordance with chapters 3.”
State v. Oakley, 117 Wash. App. 730 (Wash. Ct. App. 2003). “050 likewise provides that in district court trials, “the defendant or the state may demand a jury .”
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.