Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 36.75.300 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026

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

The legislative authority of each county may by resolution classify and designate portions of the county roads as primitive roads where the designated road portion:

(1) Is not classified as part of the county primary road system, as provided for in RCW 36.86.070;

(2) Has a gravel or earth driving surface; and

(3) Has an average annual daily traffic of one hundred or fewer vehicles.

Any road designated as a primitive road shall be marked with signs indicating that it is a primitive road, as provided in the manual of uniform traffic control devices, at all places where the primitive road portion begins or connects with a highway other than another primitive road. No design or signing or maintenance standards or requirements, other than the requirement that warning signs be placed as provided in this section, apply to primitive roads.

The design of a primitive road, any discretionary maintenance, and the location, placing, or failing to place road signs, other than the requirement that warning signs be placed as provided in this section, shall not be considered in any action for damages brought against a county, or against a county employee or county employees, or both, arising from vehicular traffic on the primitive road.

[ 2014 c 205 s 1; 1985 c 369 s 2; 1980 c 45 s 1.]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 4 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2001–2021 · leading case: Standing Rock Homeowners Assn. v. Misich, 23 P.3d 520 (Wash. Ct. App. 2001).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Standing Rock Homeowners Assn. v. Misich, 23 P.3d 520 (Wash. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 2× “080 and RCW 36.75.300. His contention is unpersuasive as the trial court correctly noted that the common law elements of a prescriptive easement apply to establishing a public road by prescription under RCW 36.”

Standing Rock Homeowners Ass'n v. Misich, 23 P.3d 520 (Wash. Ct. App. 2001). “080 and RCW 36.75.300. His contention is unpersuasive, as the trial court correctly noted that the common law elements of a prescriptive easement apply to establishing a public road by prescription under RCW 36.”

Raymond Cook et ux v. Tarbert Logging, Inc., 360 P.3d 855 (Wash. Ct. App. 2015). “RCW 36.75.300. By statute, counties are relieved of certain road design, signage, and maintenance standards with respect to primitive roads.”

Gamble Land & Timber, Ltd. v. Okanogan Cnty. (Wash. Ct. App. 2021). “RCW 36.75.300(3) (primitive roads). And there is evidence of some maintenance.”

— Wash. Rev. Code § 36.75.300(3) — 1 case

Gamble Land & Timber, Ltd. v. Okanogan Cnty. (Wash. Ct. App. 2021). “RCW 36.75.300(3) (primitive roads). And there is evidence of some maintenance.”

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.