Wash. Rev. Code » Title 34 · Chapter 34.05
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 34.05.518 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(1)(a) The final decision of an administrative agency in an adjudicative proceeding under this chapter may be directly reviewed by the court of appeals either: (i) Upon certification by the superior court pursuant to this subsection and subsections (2) and (3) of this section; or (ii) if the final decision is from an environmental board as identified in RCW 43.21B.005 and the final decision relates to a clean energy project as defined in RCW 43.158.010, pursuant to subsection (4) of this section.
(b) The superior court may certify cases for transfer to the court of appeals upon finding that:
(i) All parties have consented to the transfer to the court of appeals and agreed that the judicial review can occur based upon the agency record developed before the administrative body without supplementing the record pursuant to RCW 34.05.562; or
(ii) One or more of the parties have not consented to the transfer, but the superior court finds that transfer would serve the interest of justice, would not cause substantial prejudice to any party, including any unrepresented party, and further finds that:
(A) The judicial review can occur based upon the agency record developed before the administrative body without supplementing the record pursuant to RCW 34.05.562; or
(B) The superior court has completed any necessary supplementation of the record pursuant to RCW 34.05.562, such that only issues of law remain for determination.
(2) If the superior court certifies a final decision of an administrative agency in an adjudicative proceeding, the superior court shall transfer the matter to the court of appeals as a direct appeal.
(3) A party contesting a superior court decision granting or denying certification for direct review may file a motion for discretionary review with the court of appeals.
(4)(a) For the appeal of a permit related to a clean energy project, as defined in RCW 43.158.010, that is the subject of a final adjudicative decision of an environmental board, as identified in RCW 43.21B.005, upon a motion filed by any party to the appeal, the superior court shall certify a case for transfer to the court of appeals upon a finding that:
(i) The judicial review can occur based upon the agency record developed before the administrative body without supplementing the record pursuant to RCW 34.05.562; or
(ii) The superior court has completed any necessary supplementation of the record pursuant to RCW 34.05.562.
(b) If the superior court certifies a final decision of an administrative agency in an adjudicative proceeding, the superior court shall transfer the matter to the court of appeals as a direct appeal.
(c) A party contesting a superior court decision granting or denying certification for direct review may file a motion for discretionary review with the court of appeals. Where a contesting party demonstrates that substantial prejudice would result from direct review by the court of appeals, the court of appeals may remand to the superior court.
(5) Transfer of cases pursuant to this section does not require the filing of a motion for discretionary review with the court of appeals.
[ 2024 c 347 s 1; 2021 c 305 s 2; 2010 c 211 s 15; 2003 c 393 s 16; 1995 c 382 s 5; 1988 c 288 s 503; 1980 c 76 s 1. Formerly RCW 34.04.133.]

Notes:

Expiration date—2024 c 347 s 1: "Section 1 of this act expires July 1, 2026." [ 2024 c 347 s 13.]
Expiration date—2021 c 305 ss 2 and 3: "Sections 2 and 3 of this act expire July 1, 2026." [ 2021 c 305 s 8.]
Effective date—2021 c 305: See note following RCW 36.70C.150.
Effective date—Transfer of power, duties, and functions—2010 c 211: See notes following RCW 36.70A.250.
PDF

RCW 34.05.518

Direct review by court of appeals. (Effective July 1, 2026.)

(1) The final decision of an administrative agency in an adjudicative proceeding under this chapter may be directly reviewed by the court of appeals either (a) upon certification by the superior court pursuant to subsection (2) of this section ; (b) if the final decision is from an environmental board as identified in RCW 43.21B.005 and the final decision relates to a clean energy project as defined in RCW 43.158.010, pursuant to subsection (3) of this section; or (c) if the final decision is from an environmental board identified in RCW 43.21B.005 and the final decision does not relate to a clean energy project as defined in RCW 43.158.010, pursuant to subsection (4) of this section. Transfer of a case pursuant to subsections (3) or (4) of this section does not require the filing of a motion for discretionary review with the court of appeals.
(2)(a) For direct review upon certification by the superior court, an application for direct review must be filed with the superior court within thirty days of the filing of the petition for review in superior court. The superior court may certify a case for direct review only if the judicial review is limited to the record of the agency proceeding and the court finds that:
(i) Fundamental and urgent issues affecting the future administrative process or the public interest are involved which require a prompt determination;
(ii) Delay in obtaining a final and prompt determination of such issues would be detrimental to any party or the public interest;
(iii) An appeal to the court of appeals would be likely regardless of the determination in superior court; and
(iv) The appellate court's determination in the proceeding would have significant precedential value.
(b) Procedures for certification shall be established by court rule.
(3)(a) For the appeal of a permit related to a clean energy project, as defined in RCW 43.158.010, that is the subject of a final adjudicative decision of an environmental board, as identified in RCW 43.21B.005, upon a motion filed by any party to the appeal, the superior court shall certify a case for transfer to the court of appeals upon a finding that:
(i) The judicial review can occur based upon the agency record developed before the administrative body without supplementing the record pursuant to RCW 34.05.562; or
(ii) The superior court has completed any necessary supplementation of the record pursuant to RCW 34.05.562.
(b) If the superior court certifies a final decision of an administrative agency in an adjudicative proceeding, the superior court shall transfer the matter to the court of appeals as a direct appeal.
(c) A party contesting a superior court decision granting or denying certification for direct review may file a motion for discretionary review with the court of appeals. Where a contesting party demonstrates that substantial prejudice would result from direct review by the court of appeals, the court of appeals may remand to [the] superior court.
(4)(a) The final adjudicative decision of an environmental board, as identified in RCW 43.21B.005, that does not relate to a clean energy project as defined in RCW 43.158.010, may be directly reviewed by the court of appeals upon certification by the superior court pursuant to this subsection. The superior court shall certify cases for transfer to the court of appeals upon finding that:
(i) All parties have consented to the transfer to the court of appeals and agreed that the judicial review can occur based upon the agency record developed before the administrative body without supplementing the record pursuant to RCW 34.05.562; or
(ii) One or more of the parties have not consented to the transfer, but the superior court finds that transfer would serve the interest of justice, would not cause substantial prejudice to any party, including any unrepresented party, and further finds that:
(A) The judicial review can occur based upon the agency record developed before the administrative body without supplementing the record pursuant to RCW 34.05.562; or
(B) The superior court has completed any necessary supplementation of the record pursuant to RCW 34.05.562, such that only issues of law remain for determination.
(b) If the superior court certifies a final decision of an administrative agency in an adjudicative proceeding, the superior court shall transfer the matter to the court of appeals as a direct appeal.
(c) A party contesting a superior court decision granting or denying certification for direct review may file a motion for discretionary review with the court of appeals. Where a contesting party demonstrates that substantial prejudice would result from direct review by the court of appeals, the court of appeals may remand to the superior court.
[ 2024 c 347 s 2; 2021 c 305 s 5; 2010 c 211 s 15; 2003 c 393 s 16; 1995 c 382 s 5; 1988 c 288 s 503; 1980 c 76 s 1. Formerly RCW 34.04.133.]

Notes:

Effective date—2024 c 347 s 2: "Section 2 of this act takes effect July 1, 2026." [ 2024 c 347 s 14.]
Effective date—2021 c 305 ss 5 and 6: "Sections 5 and 6 of this act take effect July 1, 2026." [ 2021 c 305 s 9.]
Effective date—Transfer of power, duties, and functions—2010 c 211: See notes following RCW 36.70A.250.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 78 cases (43 in the last 5 years), 1991–2026 · leading case: Davidson Serles & Assocs. v. Cent. Puget Sound Growth Mgmt. Hearings Bd., 159 Wash. App. 148 (Wash. Ct. App. 2010).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Davidson Serles & Assocs. v. Cent. Puget Sound Growth Mgmt. Hearings Bd., 159 Wash. App. 148 (Wash. Ct. App. 2010). · cites it 8× “A Board may, pursuant to RCW 34.05.518, issue a certificate of appealability that allows a final decision of a Board to be directly reviewed by the Court of Appeals where the court grants direct review.”
Medina v. Pub. Util. Dist. No. 1, 147 Wash. 2d 303 (Wash. 2002). · cites it 2× “In that case, however, strict compliance was required because of the nature of RCW 34.05.518. That statute requires explicit action on the part of petitioners, mandating they file their claim within 30 days.”
Medina v. Pub. Util. Dist. No. 1, 53 P.3d 993 (Wash. 2002). · cites it 2× “In that case, however, strict compliance was required because of the nature of RCW 34.05.518. That statute requires explicit action on the part of petitioners, mandating they file their claim within 30 days.”
Bowers v. Pollution Control Hearings Bd., 13 P.3d 1076 (Wash. Ct. App. 2000). · cites it 4× “We also refer to RCW 34.05.518, which permits this court to accept review of an administrative agency's final decision upon certification by either the superior court or an environmental board.”
Bowers v. Pollution Control Hearings Bd., 103 Wash. App. 587 (Wash. Ct. App. 2000). · cites it 4× “We also refer to RCW 34.05.518, which permits this court to accept review of an administrative agency’s final decision upon certification by either the superior court or an environmental board.”
Skagit Surveyors v. FRIENDS OF SKAGIT, 958 P.2d 962 (Wash. 1998). · cites it 2× “Surveyors properly served some of the parties but failed to directly serve Skagit County, the City of Anacortes and the City of Mount Vernon.”
Skagit Surveyors & Engineers, LLC v. Friends of Skagit Cnty., 135 Wash. 2d 542 (Wash. 1998). · cites it 2× “Surveyors properly served some of the parties but failed to directly serve Skagit County, the City of Anacortes and the City of Mount Vernon.”
Residents Opposed Turbines v. State Efsec, 197 P.3d 1153 (Wash. 2008). · cites it 2× “We already have a rule that permits the Court of Appeals to take direct review of a final decision by an administrative agency. RAP 2.”
City of Seattle v. Pub. Emp. Relations Comm'n, 809 P.2d 1377 (Wash. 1991). · cites it 2× “133 (recodified at RCW 34.05.518). The trial court certified the case for direct review as required by former RCW 34.”
Pub. Util. DIST. v. State, Dept. of Ecology, 51 P.3d 744 (Wash. 2002). “Other issues resolved by the Board are not pertinent to our review.”
Pub. Util. Dist. No. 1 v. Dep't of Ecology, 146 Wash. 2d 778 (Wash. 2002). “Other issues resolved by the Board are not pertinent to our review.”
Residents Opposed to Kittitas Turbines v. State Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council, 165 Wash. 2d 275 (Wash. 2008). “Pursuant to RCW 34.05.518(2): The superior court may certify a case for direct review only if the judicial review is limited to the record of the agency proceeding and the court finds that: (a) Fundamental and urgent issues affecting the future administrative process or the…”
Show all 78 citing cases →
— Wash. Rev. Code § 34.05.518(1) — 4 cases
Davidson Serles & Assocs. v. Cent. Puget Sound Growth Mgmt. Hearings Bd., 159 Wash. App. 148 (Wash. Ct. App. 2010). “A Board may, pursuant to RCW 34.05.518, issue a certificate of appealability that allows a final decision of a Board to be directly reviewed by the Court of Appeals where the court grants direct review.”
Davidson Serles v. Cent. Puget Sound Growth, 244 P.3d 1003 (Wash. Ct. App. 2010).
Puget Soundkeeper All., V State Of Wa Dept. Of Ecology (Wash. Ct. App. 2017).
Laurie Englund, V. State Of Wa Emp. Sec. Dept. (Wash. Ct. App. 2024).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 34.05.518(1)(a) — 3 cases
Centurylink Comm. Llc, V. Wa Utils. & Transp. Comm'n (Wash. Ct. App. 2025).
West Coast Self-storage Grp., Llc V. State Of Wa, Dept. Of Revenue (Wash. Ct. App. 2025).
Ron Fode v. Dep't of Ecology (Wash. Ct. App. 2025).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 34.05.518(1)(a)(i) — 1 case
Jessica Tuffley v. Emp. Sec. Dep't (Wash. Ct. App. 2024).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 34.05.518(1)(a)(ii) — 1 case
Laurie Englund, V. State Of Wa Emp. Sec. Dept. (Wash. Ct. App. 2024).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 34.05.518(1)(b) — 3 cases
King Cnty., V. Friends Of Sammamish Valley (Wash. Ct. App. 2023).
Laurie Englund, V. State Of Wa Emp. Sec. Dept. (Wash. Ct. App. 2024).
Young's Mkt. Co. Of Wa, Llc, V. State Of Wa, Dep't Of Revenue (Wash. Ct. App. 2026).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 34.05.518(1)(b)(i) — 3 cases
Logan Munoz, V. Washington State Health Care Auth. (Wash. Ct. App. 2025).
Logan Munoz, V. Washington State Health Care Auth. (Wash. Ct. App. 2025).
Craig R. Jolley, Dmd, Pllc, V. State Of Wa Off. Of Ins Comm'r (Wash. Ct. App. 2025).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 34.05.518(2) — 6 cases
Residents Opposed Turbines v. State Efsec, 197 P.3d 1153 (Wash. 2008). “We already have a rule that permits the Court of Appeals to take direct review of a final decision by an administrative agency. RAP 2.”
Residents Opposed to Kittitas Turbines v. State Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council, 165 Wash. 2d 275 (Wash. 2008). “Pursuant to RCW 34.05.518(2): The superior court may certify a case for direct review only if the judicial review is limited to the record of the agency proceeding and the court finds that: (a) Fundamental and urgent issues affecting the future administrative process or the…”
Bowers v. Pollution Control Hearings Bd., 13 P.3d 1076 (Wash. Ct. App. 2000). “We also refer to RCW 34.05.518, which permits this court to accept review of an administrative agency's final decision upon certification by either the superior court or an environmental board.”
Bowers v. Pollution Control Hearings Bd., 103 Wash. App. 587 (Wash. Ct. App. 2000). “We also refer to RCW 34.05.518, which permits this court to accept review of an administrative agency’s final decision upon certification by either the superior court or an environmental board.”
City Of Everett v. Washington Pub. Relations Comm'n & Iaff Local 46 (Wash. Ct. App. 2019).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 34.05.518(3) — 5 cases
Bowers v. Pollution Control Hearings Bd., 13 P.3d 1076 (Wash. Ct. App. 2000). “We also refer to RCW 34.05.518, which permits this court to accept review of an administrative agency's final decision upon certification by either the superior court or an environmental board.”
Bowers v. Pollution Control Hearings Bd., 103 Wash. App. 587 (Wash. Ct. App. 2000). “We also refer to RCW 34.05.518, which permits this court to accept review of an administrative agency’s final decision upon certification by either the superior court or an environmental board.”
Davidson Serles & Assocs. v. Cent. Puget Sound Growth Mgmt. Hearings Bd., 159 Wash. App. 148 (Wash. Ct. App. 2010). “A Board may, pursuant to RCW 34.05.518, issue a certificate of appealability that allows a final decision of a Board to be directly reviewed by the Court of Appeals where the court grants direct review.”
Davidson Serles v. Cent. Puget Sound Growth, 244 P.3d 1003 (Wash. Ct. App. 2010).
City of Kennewick v. Futurewise (Wash. Ct. App. 2022).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 34.05.518(5) — 2 cases
Davidson Serles & Assocs. v. Cent. Puget Sound Growth Mgmt. Hearings Bd., 159 Wash. App. 148 (Wash. Ct. App. 2010). “A Board may, pursuant to RCW 34.05.518, issue a certificate of appealability that allows a final decision of a Board to be directly reviewed by the Court of Appeals where the court grants direct review.”
Davidson Serles v. Cent. Puget Sound Growth, 244 P.3d 1003 (Wash. Ct. App. 2010).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 34.05.518(6)(a) — 2 cases
Davidson Serles & Assocs. v. Cent. Puget Sound Growth Mgmt. Hearings Bd., 159 Wash. App. 148 (Wash. Ct. App. 2010). “A Board may, pursuant to RCW 34.05.518, issue a certificate of appealability that allows a final decision of a Board to be directly reviewed by the Court of Appeals where the court grants direct review.”
Davidson Serles v. Cent. Puget Sound Growth, 244 P.3d 1003 (Wash. Ct. App. 2010).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 34.05.518(6)(d) — 2 cases
Davidson Serles & Assocs. v. Cent. Puget Sound Growth Mgmt. Hearings Bd., 159 Wash. App. 148 (Wash. Ct. App. 2010). “A Board may, pursuant to RCW 34.05.518, issue a certificate of appealability that allows a final decision of a Board to be directly reviewed by the Court of Appeals where the court grants direct review.”
Davidson Serles v. Cent. Puget Sound Growth, 244 P.3d 1003 (Wash. Ct. App. 2010).
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.