Wash. Rev. Code § 34.05.422

Rate changes, licenses

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

(1) Unless otherwise provided by law: (a) Applications for rate changes and uncontested applications for licenses may, in the agency's discretion, be conducted as adjudicative proceedings; (b) applications for licenses that are contested by a person having standing to contest under the law and review of denials of applications for licenses or rate changes must be conducted as adjudicative proceedings; and (c) an agency may not revoke, suspend, or modify a license unless the agency gives notice of an opportunity for an appropriate adjudicative proceeding in accordance with this chapter or other statute.

(2) An agency with authority to grant or deny a professional or occupational license must notify an applicant for a new or renewal license not later than twenty days prior to the date of the examination required for that license of any grounds for denial of the license which are based on specific information disclosed in the application submitted to the agency. The agency must notify the applicant either that the license is denied or that the decision to grant or deny the license will be made at a future date. If the agency fails to give the notification prior to the examination and the applicant is denied licensure, the examination fee must be refunded to the applicant. If the applicant takes the examination, the agency must notify the applicant of the result.

(3) When a licensee has made timely and sufficient application for the renewal of a license or a new license with reference to any activity of a continuing nature, an existing full, temporary, or provisional license does not expire until the application has been finally determined by the agency, and, in case the application is denied or the terms of the new license limited, until the last day for seeking review of the agency order or a later date fixed by order of the reviewing court.

(4) If the agency finds that public health, safety, or welfare imperatively requires emergency action, and incorporates a finding to that effect in its order, summary suspension of a license may be ordered pending proceedings for revocation or other action. These proceedings must be promptly instituted and determined.

(5) This section does not apply to requests made by the department of revenue, under the authority of RCW 82.08.155, to the *liquor control board to suspend a person's spirits license and to refuse to renew any spirits license held by the person and to issue any new spirits license to the person.

[ 2012 c 39 s 6; 1989 c 175 s 13; 1988 c 288 s 405; 1980 c 33 s 1; 1967 c 237 s 8. Formerly RCW 34.04.170.]

Notes:

*Reviser's note: The "state liquor control board" was renamed the "state liquor and cannabis board" by 2015 c 70 s 3.

Construction—Effective date—2012 c 39: See notes following RCW 82.08.155.

Effective date—1989 c 175: See note following RCW 34.05.010.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 15 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1993–2025 · leading case: Seattle Building & Construction Trades Council v. Apprenticeship & Training Council

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Seattle Building & Construction Trades Council v. Apprenticeship & Training Council (1996) wash · cites it 4× “Here, the duty the agency allegedly failed to perform was to hold an adjudicatory hearing required by RCW 34.05.422(1)(b). The parties dispute whether, in conducting its review, this court should defer either to the superior court, which held that an adjudication under the APA…”

Conway v. Department of Social & Health Services (2005) washctapp · cites it 2× “WAPA also requires the presiding officer to include in his or her initial and final orders “a statement of findings and conclusions, and the reasons and basis therefor, on all the material issues of fact, law, or discretion presented on the record, including the remedy or…”

Abdullatif Arishi v. Washington State University (2016) washctapp · cites it 2× “010(9)(a), and therefore subject to being" ‘conducted as adjudicative proceedings’ ” by RCW 34.05.422(1)(b). Seattle Bldg., 129 Wn.”

Western Washington Operating Engineers Apprenticeship Committee v. Washington State Apprenticeship & Training Council (2005) washctapp · cites it 2× “RCW 34.05.422 provides, in relevant part, “(1) Unless otherwise provided bylaw: .”

Hannum v. Friedt (1997) washctapp · cites it 4× “” Based on these findings, the director concluded that Hannum’s "vehicle dealer license should be summarily suspended for cause pending further suspension or revocation proceedings, pursuant to RCW 34.05.422(4)[ 2 ] of the Administrative Procedure Act and RCW 46.”

Western Wash. Engineers v. Apprenticeship and Training Council (2005) washctapp · cites it 2× “[8] RCW 34.05.422 provides, in relevant part, "(1) Unless otherwise provided by law: .”

Crown Resources, Corp. v. Dep't of Ecology (2019) washctapp · cites it 9× “THE SUPERIOR COURT PROPERLY AFFIRMED THE BOARD’S CONCLUSION THAT THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE 2014 PERMIT WAS NOT STAYED DURING THE BOARD APPEAL Finally, Crown contends that the effective date of the 2014 permit was automatically stayed under RCW 34.05.422(3) during the pendency of…”

Seattle Area Plumbers, Housing Plumbers, Pipefitters, Refrigeration, & Marine Pipefitters Apprenticeship Committee v. Wa (2006) washctapp “And RCW 34.05.422(l)(b) required a full adjudicative hearing when an agency granted a license.”

Boise Cascade Corp. v. Washington Toxics Coalition (1993) washctapp “Under RCW 34.05.422(4), an agency may suspend a "license" pending proceedings for revocation "or other action" if the agency finds a suspension is required by considerations of "public health, safety, or welfare .”

Seattle Bldg. Council v. Appren. Council (1996) wash · cites it 4× “Here, the duty the agency allegedly failed to perform was the failure to hold an adjudicatory hearing required by RCW 34.05.422(1)(b). The parties dispute whether, in conducting its review, this court should defer either to the superior court, which held that an adjudication…”

Seattle Area Plumbers v. APPRENTICESHIP AND TRAINING COUNCIL (2006) washctapp “And RCW 34.05.422(1)(b) required a full adjudicative hearing when an agency granted a license.”

National Association Of Veterinary Technicians In America (2025) washctapp · cites it 4× “” RCW 34.05.422(1)(b). The APA defines “license,” as a “franchise, permit, certification, approval, registration, charter, or similar form of authorization required by law.”

Show all 15 citing cases →

— Wash. Rev. Code § 34.05.422(1)(b) — 8 cases

Seattle Building & Construction Trades Council v. Apprenticeship & Training Council (1996) wash “Here, the duty the agency allegedly failed to perform was to hold an adjudicatory hearing required by RCW 34.05.422(1)(b). The parties dispute whether, in conducting its review, this court should defer either to the superior court, which held that an adjudication under the APA…”

Abdullatif Arishi v. Washington State University (2016) washctapp “010(9)(a), and therefore subject to being" ‘conducted as adjudicative proceedings’ ” by RCW 34.05.422(1)(b). Seattle Bldg., 129 Wn.”

Western Washington Operating Engineers Apprenticeship Committee v. Washington State Apprenticeship & Training Council (2005) washctapp “RCW 34.05.422 provides, in relevant part, “(1) Unless otherwise provided bylaw: .”

Western Wash. Engineers v. Apprenticeship and Training Council (2005) washctapp “[8] RCW 34.05.422 provides, in relevant part, "(1) Unless otherwise provided by law: .”

Seattle Bldg. Council v. Appren. Council (1996) wash “Here, the duty the agency allegedly failed to perform was the failure to hold an adjudicatory hearing required by RCW 34.05.422(1)(b). The parties dispute whether, in conducting its review, this court should defer either to the superior court, which held that an adjudication…”

— Wash. Rev. Code § 34.05.422(3) — 1 case

Crown Resources, Corp. v. Dep't of Ecology (2019) washctapp “THE SUPERIOR COURT PROPERLY AFFIRMED THE BOARD’S CONCLUSION THAT THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE 2014 PERMIT WAS NOT STAYED DURING THE BOARD APPEAL Finally, Crown contends that the effective date of the 2014 permit was automatically stayed under RCW 34.05.422(3) during the pendency of…”

— Wash. Rev. Code § 34.05.422(4) — 2 cases

Hannum v. Friedt (1997) washctapp “” Based on these findings, the director concluded that Hannum’s "vehicle dealer license should be summarily suspended for cause pending further suspension or revocation proceedings, pursuant to RCW 34.05.422(4)[ 2 ] of the Administrative Procedure Act and RCW 46.”

— Wash. Rev. Code § 34.05.422(l)(b) — 4 cases

Western Washington Operating Engineers Apprenticeship Committee v. Washington State Apprenticeship & Training Council (2008) washctapp

— Wash. Rev. Code § 34.05.422(l)(c) — 1 case

Conway v. Department of Social & Health Services (2005) washctapp “WAPA also requires the presiding officer to include in his or her initial and final orders “a statement of findings and conclusions, and the reasons and basis therefor, on all the material issues of fact, law, or discretion presented on the record, including the remedy or…”

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.