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

Wash. Rev. Code § 34.05.902 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
RCW 34.05.001 through 34.05.902 shall take effect on July 1, 1989, and shall apply to all rule-making actions and agency proceedings begun on or after that date. Rule-making actions or other agency proceedings begun before July 1, 1989, shall be completed under the applicable provisions of chapter 28B.19 or 34.04 RCW existing immediately before that date in the same manner as if they were not amended by chapter 288, Laws of 1988 or repealed by section 701 of chapter 288, Laws of 1988.
[ 1988 c 288 s 705.]

Notes:

Recodification—Correction of statutory references—1988 c 288: "Parts X through XV of this act shall constitute a new chapter in Title 34 RCW, and the sections amended or set forth in this act shall be recodified in the order they appear in this act. The code reviser shall correct all statutory references to these sections and to the repealed chapters 28B.19 and 34.04 RCW to reflect this recodification and repeal." [ 1988 c 288 s 706.]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 28 cases, 1990–2003 · leading case: Haley v. Med. Disciplinary Bd., 818 P.2d 1062 (Wash. 1991).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Haley v. Med. Disciplinary Bd., 818 P.2d 1062 (Wash. 1991). · cites it 2× “[2-5] Because the Board is an administrative agency, judicial review of the Board's decisions is limited by the Administrative Procedure Act, RCW 34.”
Washington Indep. Tel. Ass'n v. Utils. & Transp. Comm'n, 64 P.3d 606 (Wash. 2003). · cites it 2× “See RCW 34.05.902. [16] Other principles noted in Neah Bay continue to apply, however, as the APA continues to contain most of the same provisions existing at the time the case was decided.”
City of Seattle v. Pub. Emp. Relations Comm'n, 809 P.2d 1377 (Wash. 1991). · cites it 2× “See Laws of 1988, ch. 288. Since these amendments took place after the initiation of agency action in this case, they are relevant only insofar as they bear on the interpretation of the terms of the old statute.”
Tuerk v. Dep't of Licensing, 864 P.2d 1382 (Wash. 1994). · cites it 2× “See RCW 34.05.902. The first issue is whether DOL was authorized to require brokers to provide their current home addresses on its change of business address forms.”
Waste Mgmt. of Seattle, Inc. v. Utils. & Transp. Comm'n, 869 P.2d 1034 (Wash. 1994). “The court shall set out in its findings and conclusions, as appropriate, each violation or error by the agency under the standards for review set out in this chapter on which the court bases its decision and order.”
City of Pasco v. Pub. Emp. Relations Comm'n, 833 P.2d 381 (Wash. 1992). “See RCW 34.05.902. PERC dismissed the unfair labor practice complaint on the basis that it failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted.”
Callecod v. Washington State Patrol, 929 P.2d 510 (Wash. Ct. App. 1997). “6 The effective date portion of the Administrative Procedure Act, RCW 34.05.902, provides that the standard of review for agency proceedings that began prior to July 1, 1989, is "clearly erroneous,” as outlined in the former (1967 version of) RCW 34.”
Buechel v. Dep't of Ecology, 884 P.2d 910 (Wash. 1994). “After a complete review of the record and the briefing in this case, we conclude that it would be impossible to address a constitutional takings issue for the first time at this stage because none of the factual determinations have been made to allow this court to engage in the…”
Dep't of Ecology v. Pub. Util. Dist. No. 1, 849 P.2d 646 (Wash. 1993). “RCW 34.05.902.) Under former RCW 34.04.130(6)(e), the court may reverse an agency's determination if it was "clearly erroneous in view of the entire record”.”
Russell v. Dep't of Human Rights, 854 P.2d 1087 (Wash. Ct. App. 1993). · cites it 2× “[2] It is undisputed that Russell *412 was not formally named as a respondent until over 5 years after the facts giving rise to Slumkoski's verified employment charge.”
Forsman v. Emp. Sec. Dep't, 795 P.2d 1184 (Wash. Ct. App. 1990). · cites it 2× “However, RCW 34.05.902 provides that RCW 34.05.001 through 34.”
City of Bellevue v. Int'l Ass'n of Fire Fighters, Local 1604, 831 P.2d 738 (Wash. 1992). “130 was recodified by Laws of 1988, ch. 288, § 706, and can now be found at RCW 34.”
Show all 28 citing cases →
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.