Wash. Rev. Code » Title 36 · Chapter 36.70C
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 36.70C.150 (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) The superior court may transfer the judicial review of a land use decision to the court of appeals upon finding that all parties have consented to the transfer to the court of appeals and agreed that the judicial review can occur based upon an existing record. Transfer of cases pursuant to this section does not require the filing of a motion for discretionary review with the court of appeals.
(2) Upon stipulation and consent to transfer, the parties waive the right to seek an award of attorneys' fees and costs under RCW 4.84.370, except as may be awarded following an appeal to the supreme court.
(3) RCW 36.70C.090 does not apply to a matter transferred to the court of appeals pursuant to this section.
(4) This section expires June 30, 2026.
[ 2021 c 305 s 1.]

Notes:

Effective date—2021 c 305: "Except for sections 5 and 6 of this act, 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 30 days after signed into law [June 13, 2021]." [ 2021 c 305 s 7.]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6 cases (6 in the last 5 years), 2023–2025 · leading case: Terry Miller v. City of Richland (Wash. Ct. App. 2025).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Terry Miller v. City of Richland (Wash. Ct. App. 2025). · cites it 2× “City of Richland, et al to RCW 36.70C.150(1),3 and the parties stipulated to consolidation but still filed separate briefing.”
Tom Latta v. Chelan Cnty. (Wash. Ct. App. 2023). “Under RCW 36.70C.150(1), as here, a superior court may transfer the judicial review of a land use decision to this court so long as the parties consent and agree the existing record is sufficient for review.”
Scott & Cathleen Brueske v. Chelan Cnty. (Wash. Ct. App. 2023). “The Brueskes point out that a dwelling unit requires complete living 1 “The superior court may transfer the judicial review of a land use decision to the court of appeals upon finding that all parties have consented to the transfer to the court of appeals and agreed that the…”
Rossi Larson LLC v. Chelan Cnty. (Wash. Ct. App. 2024). “” RCW 36.70C.150(1). 3 The Rossis, in their issues pertaining to the assignments of error, also challenge the findings and conclusions related to the Conditioned Approval.”
Jodi Van, Et Ano, V. City Of Burien (Wash. Ct. App. 2024). “” The hearing examiner denied Van’s appeal, upholding the SWO and suspension of the building permit pending further review of the project with respect to the shoreline, floodplain, right-of-way, and other code requirements. Van filed a land use petition under LUPA with the King…”
Jodi Van, Et Ano, V. City Of Burien (Wash. Ct. App. 2024). “” The hearing examiner denied Van’s appeal, upholding the SWO and suspension of the building permit pending further review of the project with respect to the shoreline, floodplain, right-of-way, and other code requirements. Van filed a land use petition under LUPA with the King…”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 36.70C.150(1) — 6 cases
Terry Miller v. City of Richland (Wash. Ct. App. 2025). “City of Richland, et al to RCW 36.70C.150(1),3 and the parties stipulated to consolidation but still filed separate briefing.”
Tom Latta v. Chelan Cnty. (Wash. Ct. App. 2023). “Under RCW 36.70C.150(1), as here, a superior court may transfer the judicial review of a land use decision to this court so long as the parties consent and agree the existing record is sufficient for review.”
Scott & Cathleen Brueske v. Chelan Cnty. (Wash. Ct. App. 2023). “The Brueskes point out that a dwelling unit requires complete living 1 “The superior court may transfer the judicial review of a land use decision to the court of appeals upon finding that all parties have consented to the transfer to the court of appeals and agreed that the…”
Rossi Larson LLC v. Chelan Cnty. (Wash. Ct. App. 2024). “” RCW 36.70C.150(1). 3 The Rossis, in their issues pertaining to the assignments of error, also challenge the findings and conclusions related to the Conditioned Approval.”
Jodi Van, Et Ano, V. City Of Burien (Wash. Ct. App. 2024). “” The hearing examiner denied Van’s appeal, upholding the SWO and suspension of the building permit pending further review of the project with respect to the shoreline, floodplain, right-of-way, and other code requirements. Van filed a land use petition under LUPA with the King…”
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.