Wash. Rev. Code » Title 4 · Chapter 4.72
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 4.72.010 (2026)

Causes for enumerated

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
The superior court in which a judgment or final order has been rendered, or made, shall have power to vacate or modify such judgment or order:
(1) By granting a new trial for the cause, within the time and in the manner, and for any of the causes prescribed by the rules of court relating to new trials.
(2) By a new trial granted in proceedings against defendant served by publication only as prescribed in RCW 4.28.200.
(3) For mistakes, neglect or omission of the clerk, or irregularity in obtaining a judgment or order.
(4) For fraud practiced by the successful party in obtaining the judgment or order.
(5) For erroneous proceedings against a minor or person of unsound mind, when the condition of such defendant does not appear in the record, nor the error in the proceedings.
(6) For the death of one of the parties before the judgment in the action.
(7) For unavoidable casualty, or misfortune preventing the party from prosecuting or defending.
(8) For error in a judgment shown by a minor, within twelve months after arriving at full age.
[ 1957 c 9 s 4; Code 1881 s 436; 1877 p 96 s 438; 1875 p 20 s 1; RRS s 464.]

Notes:

Rules of court: Cf. CR 52(d), CR 60(b).
Judgment to recover realty, vacation: RCW 7.28.260.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 38 cases, 1953–2020 · leading case: Stanley v. Cole, 157 Wash. App. 873 (Wash. Ct. App. 2010).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Stanley v. Cole, 157 Wash. App. 873 (Wash. Ct. App. 2010). · cites it 7× “While CR 60(b) largely follows its federal counterpart, several subsections, including CR 60(b)(9), were instead taken from RCW 4.72.010. That statute allowed a superior court to vacate a judgment “[f]or unavoidable casualty, or misfortune preventing the party from prosecuting…”
Stanley v. Cole, 239 P.3d 611 (Wash. Ct. App. 2010). · cites it 7× “While CR 60(b) largely follows its federal counterpart, several subsections, including CR 60(b)(9), were instead taken from RCW 4.72.010. That statute allowed a superior court to vacate a judgment "[f]or unavoidable casualty, or misfortune preventing the party from prosecuting…”
State v. Scott, 580 P.2d 1099 (Wash. Ct. App. 1978). · cites it 9× “2d 60 (1973) and RCW 4.72.010 control, and that the court lost jurisdiction to modify in the absence of any indication that one of the statutory grounds for modification or vacation of judgments was present.”
Handley v. Mortland, 342 P.2d 612 (Wash. 1959). · cites it 14× “RCW 4.72.010 provides in part: "The superior court in which a judgment or final order has been rendered, or made, shall have power to vacate or modify such judgment or order: .”
State v. Scott, 595 P.2d 549 (Wash. 1979). · cites it 3× “2d 60 (1973), we said at page 665: To dispel any remaining uncertainty, we now hold that RCW 4.72.010 is applicable to a motion to modify or vacate a judgment in a criminal proceeding.”
State v. Keller, 647 P.2d 35 (Wash. Ct. App. 1982). “Relief from judgments and orders in both civil and criminal cases is governed by CR 60(b), which supersedes RCW 4.72.010. State v. Scott, 92 Wn.2d 209 , 595 P.”
State v. Wells, 500 P.2d 1012 (Wash. Ct. App. 1972). · cites it 7× “A ground for vacation or modification as set forth in RCW 4.72.010 must be present. In re Lucas, 26 Wn.”
State v. Price, 370 P.2d 979 (Wash. 1962). · cites it 3× “November 24, 1959, defendant was sentenced upon the June 2, 1959, verdict of the jury to imprisonment in the state penitentiary as an habitual criminal.”
Doss v. Schuller, 288 P.2d 475 (Wash. 1956). · cites it 3× “They would proceed under subdivisions (1) and (4) of RCW 4.72.010 et seq. [cf. . Rem. Rev. Stat.”
In RE McNUTT v. Delmore, 288 P.2d 848 (Wash. 1955). “RCW 4.72.010], governing the vacation of civil judgments, applied to criminal judgments and sentences.”
Pedersen v. Klinkert, 352 P.2d 1025 (Wash. 1960). “The appellants are proceeding, as they must under RCW 4.72.010, et seq., the time for an appeal having expired.”
Johanson v. United Truck Lines, 383 P.2d 512 (Wash. 1963). · cites it 2× “The plaintiff’s attorneys then wrote a letter to the defendant, addressed to its Spokane office, asking payment of the judgment; and the defendant, claiming that this letter (received December 7, 1961) was the first notice it had of the pendency of the *439 action, petitioned…”
Show all 38 citing cases →
— Wash. Rev. Code § 4.72.010(1) — 1 case
Doss v. Schuller, 288 P.2d 475 (Wash. 1956). “They would proceed under subdivisions (1) and (4) of RCW 4.72.010 et seq. [cf. . Rem. Rev. Stat.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 4.72.010(2) — 1 case
Corp. Loan & Sec. Co. v. Peterson, 391 P.2d 199 (Wash. 1964).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 4.72.010(3) — 2 cases
State v. Price, 370 P.2d 979 (Wash. 1962). “November 24, 1959, defendant was sentenced upon the June 2, 1959, verdict of the jury to imprisonment in the state penitentiary as an habitual criminal.”
Handley v. Mortland, 342 P.2d 612 (Wash. 1959). “RCW 4.72.010 provides in part: "The superior court in which a judgment or final order has been rendered, or made, shall have power to vacate or modify such judgment or order: .”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 4.72.010(5) — 1 case
Writ of Appeal of Persons v. State, 354 P.2d 895 (Wash. 1960).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 4.72.010(7) — 4 cases
Stanley v. Cole, 157 Wash. App. 873 (Wash. Ct. App. 2010). “While CR 60(b) largely follows its federal counterpart, several subsections, including CR 60(b)(9), were instead taken from RCW 4.72.010. That statute allowed a superior court to vacate a judgment “[f]or unavoidable casualty, or misfortune preventing the party from prosecuting…”
Stanley v. Cole, 239 P.3d 611 (Wash. Ct. App. 2010). “While CR 60(b) largely follows its federal counterpart, several subsections, including CR 60(b)(9), were instead taken from RCW 4.72.010. That statute allowed a superior court to vacate a judgment "[f]or unavoidable casualty, or misfortune preventing the party from prosecuting…”
Johanson v. United Truck Lines, 383 P.2d 512 (Wash. 1963). “The plaintiff’s attorneys then wrote a letter to the defendant, addressed to its Spokane office, asking payment of the judgment; and the defendant, claiming that this letter (received December 7, 1961) was the first notice it had of the pendency of the *439 action, petitioned…”
Stanley v. Cole, 239 P.3d 611 (Wash. Ct. App. 2010).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 4.72.010(8) — 1 case
Handley v. Mortland, 342 P.2d 612 (Wash. 1959). “RCW 4.72.010 provides in part: "The superior court in which a judgment or final order has been rendered, or made, shall have power to vacate or modify such judgment or order: .”
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.