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

Wash. Rev. Code § 4.105.050 (2026)

Proof

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
In ruling on a motion under RCW 4.105.020, the court shall consider the pleadings, the motion, any reply or response to the motion, and any evidence that could be considered in ruling on a motion for summary judgment under superior court civil rule 56.
[ 2021 c 259 s 6.]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases (5 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). “RCW 4.105.050. The responding party can survive the motion by either (1) establishing a prima facie case as to each element of their cause of action or (2) establishing that there is a genuine issue as to any material fact.”
Jeffrey Thurman v. Cowles Co. (Wash. Ct. App. 2024). “” RCW 4.105.050. The court must dismiss the cause of action or part of the cause of action if three conditions are met: (1) the moving party establishes under RCW 4.”
TorchStar Corp v. Hyatech Inc (E.D. Wash. 2023). “§ 4.105.050. 24 2. Noerr-Pennington doctrine 25 The Noerr-Pennington doctrine provides that “those who petition any 26 department of the government for redress are generally immune from statutory 27 liability for their petitioning conduct.”
Al-Bustani v. Alger (W.D. Wash. 2022). “8 Although UPEPA provides that the court should “consider the pleadings, the 9 motion, any reply or response to the motion, and any evidence that could be considered in 10 ruling on a motion for summary judgment,” RCW 4.105.050, strict adherence to that 11 procedure would cause…”
Law Off. Of John Randolph, Pllc V. Ewu Media Llc (Wash. Ct. App. 2026). “”5 The UPEPA applies when a complaint is based on the individual’s “[e]xercise of the right of freedom of speech or of the press, the right to assemble or petition, or the 5 On appeal, Randolph states that he disagrees with the trial court’s finding that the video is a matter of…”
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.