Wash. Rev. Code » Title 4 · Chapter 4.24
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 4.24.601 (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 legislature finds that public health and safety is promoted when the public has knowledge that enables members of the public to make informed choices about risks to their health and safety. Therefore, the legislature declares as a matter of public policy that the public has a right to information necessary to protect members of the public from harm caused by alleged hazards to the public. The legislature also recognizes that protection of trade secrets, other confidential research, development, or commercial information concerning products or business methods promotes business activity and prevents unfair competition. Therefore, the legislature declares it a matter of public policy that the confidentiality of such information be protected and its unnecessary disclosure be prevented.
[ 1994 c 42 s 1.]

Notes:

Application—1994 c 42: "This act applies to all confidentiality provisions entered or executed with respect to product liability/hazardous substance claims on or after May 1, 1994." [ 1994 c 42 s 3.]
Effective date—1994 c 42: "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 shall take effect May 1, 1994." [ 1994 c 42 s 4.]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases, 2000–2018 · leading case: T-Mobile USA, Inc. v. Huawei Device USA, Inc., 115 F. Supp. 3d 1184 (W.D. Wash. 2015).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
T-Mobile USA, Inc. v. Huawei Device USA, Inc., 115 F. Supp. 3d 1184 (W.D. Wash. 2015). · cites it 4× “3 T-Mobile attempts to satisfy this alternative requirement by pointing to RCW 4.24.601. That statute is not part of the UTSA, but rather part of an act relating to public access to information about product liability and hazardous substances claims.”
State v. Noah, 9 P.3d 858 (Wash. Ct. App. 2000). “In Davies, a settlement agreement prohibited Davies from holding office in the defendant school district. After the settlement, Davies was elected to the school board.”
US Ex Rel. Gary Brunson v. Bechtel Nat'l, Inc. (9th Cir. 2018). “” Wash. Rev. Code § 4.24.601 . The entire 239-page qui tam complaint, which contains all of the allegations by all of the relators, is publicly available.”
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.