Wash. Rev. Code » Title 4 · Chapter 4.105
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 4.105.020 (2026)

Special motion for expedited relief

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(1) Prior to filing a special motion for expedited relief under subsection (2) of this section, the moving party shall provide written notice to the responding party of its intent to file the motion at least 14 days prior to filing the motion. During that time, the responding party may withdraw or amend the pleading in accordance with applicable court rules, but shall otherwise comply with the stay obligations listed in RCW 4.105.030. If the moving party fails to provide the notice required under this subsection, such failure shall not affect the moving party's right to relief under this chapter, but the moving party shall not be entitled to recover reasonable attorneys' fees under RCW 4.105.090.
(2) Not later than sixty days after a party is served with a complaint, cross-claim, counterclaim, third-party claim, or other pleading that asserts a cause of action to which this chapter applies, or at a later time on a showing of good cause, the party may file a special motion for expedited relief to dismiss the cause of action or part of the cause of action.
[ 2021 c 259 s 3.]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 19 cases (19 in the last 5 years), 2022–2026 · leading case: Thurman v. Cowles Co., 562 P.3d 777 (Wash. 2025).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Thurman v. Cowles Co., 562 P.3d 777 (Wash. 2025). · cites it 7× “” RCW 4.105.020. A “covered cause of action” is an action brought against a party based on the person’s exercise of the constitutional right of freedom of speech or of the press on a matter of public concern.”
Jeffrey Thurman v. Cowles Co. (Wash. Ct. App. 2024). · cites it 7× “080, a defendant “may appeal as a matter of right from an order denying, in whole or in part, a motion under RCW 4.105.020.” Under CR 54(b), an order 15 No.”
Siddharth Jha, V. Varisha Mahmood Khan (Wash. Ct. App. 2024). · cites it 3× “He then asserts that because Khan and Jamal did not provide an additional notice directed at the first amended complaint, their UPEPA motion “was directed at the wrong Complaint,” and they are not entitled to fees under RCW 4.105.020(1). That statute requires the party moving to…”
TorchStar Corp v. Hyatech Inc (E.D. Wash. 2023). · cites it 2× “(1) In ruling on a motion under RCW 4.105.020, the court shall 9 dismiss with prejudice a cause of action, or part of a cause of action, 10 if: (a) The moving party establishes under RCW 4.”
Samantha Gerlach, V. Bainbridge Island Sch. Dist. 303 (Wash. Ct. App. 2025). · cites it 2× “(7) During a stay under this section, the court for good cause may hear and rule on: (a) A motion unrelated to the motion under RCW 4.105.020; The CR 11 motion is a motion unrelated to the UPEPA motion under RCW 4.”
Montano v. State of Washington Dep't of Health (W.D. Wash. 2025). · cites it 2× “at 779 ; Wash. Rev. Code § 4.105.020 . A “covered cause of action” is an 16 action brought against a party based on the person's exercise of the constitutional right of 17 freedom of speech or of the press on a matter of public concern.”
Clark v. Whitepages Inc (W.D. Wash. 2025). · cites it 2× “9 (2) Should Defendant choose to file motions to dismiss Plaintiff's FAC, to strike the 10 class allegations therein, and/or for expedited relief under RCW 4.105.020, it 11 SHALL do so by July 16, 2025, and note the motions for consideration on August 12 27, 2025.”
Valve Corp., V. Bucher Law, Pllc Et Ano (Wash. Ct. App. 2025). · cites it 2× “Our Supreme Court recently confirmed, “A moving party may appeal as a matter of right from an order denying a motion under RCW 4.105.020.” Thurman v. Cowles Co., 4 Wn.”
Button (W.D. Wash. 2025). · cites it 2× “13 Wash. Rev. Code § 4.105.020 (1)(a). Defendant asserts he provided notice of intent to file a 14 UPEPA motion to Plaintiffs on September 20, 2025.”
Button (W.D. Wash. 2026). · cites it 2× “at 779 ; Wash. Rev. Code § 4.105.020 . A “covered cause of action” is an 8 action brought against a party based on the person's exercise of the constitutional right of 9 freedom of speech or of the press on a matter of public concern.”
Kurt Benshoof, V. Nathan Cliber (Wash. Ct. App. 2024). “” RCW 4.105.020(2). There are exceptions to UPEPA, one of which is that the Act does not apply to a cause of action “against a person named in a civil suit brought by a victim of a crime against a perpetrator.”
Proj. Veritas v. Leland Stanford Junior Univ. (W.D. Wash. 2022). “RCW 4.105.020(2). As is relevant 13 here, in ruling on such motion, the Court shall dismiss with prejudice a cause of action if: 14 (i) the moving party establishes that, under RCW 4.”
Show all 19 citing cases →
— Wash. Rev. Code § 4.105.020(1) — 4 cases
Thurman v. Cowles Co., 562 P.3d 777 (Wash. 2025). “” RCW 4.105.020. A “covered cause of action” is an action brought against a party based on the person’s exercise of the constitutional right of freedom of speech or of the press on a matter of public concern.”
Siddharth Jha, V. Varisha Mahmood Khan (Wash. Ct. App. 2024). “He then asserts that because Khan and Jamal did not provide an additional notice directed at the first amended complaint, their UPEPA motion “was directed at the wrong Complaint,” and they are not entitled to fees under RCW 4.105.020(1). That statute requires the party moving to…”
Clark v. Whitepages Inc (W.D. Wash. 2025). “9 (2) Should Defendant choose to file motions to dismiss Plaintiff's FAC, to strike the 10 class allegations therein, and/or for expedited relief under RCW 4.105.020, it 11 SHALL do so by July 16, 2025, and note the motions for consideration on August 12 27, 2025.”
Robert Clark, individually & on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Whitepages, Inc., a Delaware Corp. (W.D. Wash. 2026).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 4.105.020(2) — 8 cases
Thurman v. Cowles Co., 562 P.3d 777 (Wash. 2025). “” RCW 4.105.020. A “covered cause of action” is an action brought against a party based on the person’s exercise of the constitutional right of freedom of speech or of the press on a matter of public concern.”
Jeffrey Thurman v. Cowles Co. (Wash. Ct. App. 2024). “080, a defendant “may appeal as a matter of right from an order denying, in whole or in part, a motion under RCW 4.105.020.” Under CR 54(b), an order 15 No.”
Kurt Benshoof, V. Nathan Cliber (Wash. Ct. App. 2024). “” RCW 4.105.020(2). There are exceptions to UPEPA, one of which is that the Act does not apply to a cause of action “against a person named in a civil suit brought by a victim of a crime against a perpetrator.”
Proj. Veritas v. Leland Stanford Junior Univ. (W.D. Wash. 2022). “RCW 4.105.020(2). As is relevant 13 here, in ruling on such motion, the Court shall dismiss with prejudice a cause of action if: 14 (i) the moving party establishes that, under RCW 4.”
Al-Bustani v. Alger (W.D. Wash. 2022).
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.