Wash. Rev. Code » Title 4 · Chapter 4.84
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 4.84.030 (2026)

Prevailing party to recover costs

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
In any action in the superior court of Washington the prevailing party shall be entitled to his or her costs and disbursements; but the plaintiff shall in no case be entitled to costs taxed as attorneys' fees in actions within the jurisdiction of the district court when commenced in the superior court.
[ 1987 c 202 s 121; 1890 p 337 s 1; 1883 p 42 s 1; Code 1881 ss 506, 507; 1854 p 201 ss 368, 369; RRS s 476.]

Notes:

Intent—1987 c 202: See note following RCW 2.04.190.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 112 cases (12 in the last 5 years), 1952–2025 · leading case: Brown v. City of Seattle, 72 P.3d 764 (Wash. Ct. App. 2003).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Brown v. City of Seattle, 72 P.3d 764 (Wash. Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 14× “We affirm the trial court’s dismissal of Brown’s constitutional claims and its decision to award costs to Brown under RCW 4.84.030. FACTS The MTV Challenger is a 96-foot World War II era tugboat.”
Am. Legion Post 149 v. WASH. DEPT. OF HEALTH, 192 P.3d 306 (Wash. 2008). · cites it 2× “ś 70 Both KCHD and DOH request statutory attorney fees and costs pursuant to RCW 4.84.030. A prevailing party is entitled to costs and disbursements in any action in superior court.”
Am. Legion Post No. 149 v. Dep't of Health, 164 Wash. 2d 570 (Wash. 2008). · cites it 2× “¶70 Both KCHD and DOH request statutory attorney fees and costs pursuant to RCW 4.84.030. A prevailing party is entitled to costs and disbursements in any action in superior court.”
Shannon v. Pay 'N Save Corp., 709 P.2d 799 (Wash. 1985). · cites it 4× “Washington courts have long held that "costs" under RCW 4.84.030 do not include compensation paid to the expert witness in excess of ordinary witness fees.”
Tippie v. Delisle, 777 P.2d 1080 (Wash. Ct. App. 1989). · cites it 6× “Pursuant to RCW 4.84.030, a "prevailing party" is entitled to recover costs and disbursements.”
Ferencak v. Dep't of Labor & Indus., 175 P.3d 1109 (Wash. Ct. App. 2008). · cites it 3× “Statutory Attorney Fees ¶ 22 The superior court awarded the Department $200 in statutory attorney fees under RCW 4.84.030. Ferenćak argues that this is an improper award of attorney fees under RCW 51.”
Scott Fetzer Co. v. Weeks, 786 P.2d 265 (Wash. 1990). · cites it 2× “The court deemed inapplicable a statute authorizing costs awards to prevailing parties (presently codified at RCW 4.84.030), noting that "[w]hen the law was repealed upon which the action was founded neither party had `prevailed,' for the reason that no matter either of law or…”
Bays v. Haven, 777 P.2d 562 (Wash. Ct. App. 1989). · cites it 4× “The Bayses cross-appeal the trial court's failure to award statutory costs pursuant to RCW 4.84.030. We affirm as modified. The primary issue on appeal is whether ownership of the fee of the dominant estate and ownership of the servient estate by virtue of a contract of purchase…”
Panorama Vill. v. Allstate Ins. Co., 26 P.3d 910 (Wash. 2001). “2d 884 (1996) where we held, "Expert witness fees are not included in the definition of costs or recoverable as costs under RCW 4.84.030,.080 or RCW 2.40.010." (Footnotes omitted.”
Panorama Vill. Condo. Owners Ass'n Bd. of Directors v. Allstate Ins., 144 Wash. 2d 130 (Wash. 2001). “2d 884 (1996) where we held, “Expert witness fees are not included in the definition of costs or recoverable as costs under RCW 4.84.030, .080 or RCW 2.40.010.” (Footnotes omitted.”
Black v. Dept. of Labor & Indus., 933 P.2d 1025 (Wash. 1997). · cites it 2× “When the superior court dismissed this claim it awarded the Department as the prevailing party $125 in statutory attorneys' fees.”
Black v. Dep't of Labor & Indus., 131 Wash. 2d 547 (Wash. 1997). · cites it 2× “When the superior court dismissed this claim it awarded the Department as the prevailing party $125 in statutory attorneys’ fees.”
Show all 112 citing cases →
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.