Wash. Rev. Code » Title 4 · Chapter 4.84

Wash. Rev. Code § 4.84.370

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(1) Notwithstanding any other provisions of this chapter, reasonable attorneys' fees and costs shall be awarded to the prevailing party or substantially prevailing party on appeal before the court of appeals or the supreme court of a decision by a county, city, or town to issue, condition, or deny a development permit involving a site-specific rezone, zoning, plat, conditional use, variance, shoreline permit, building permit, site plan, or similar land use approval or decision. The court shall award and determine the amount of reasonable attorneys' fees and costs under this section if:
(a) The prevailing party on appeal was the prevailing or substantially prevailing party before the county, city, or town, or in a decision involving a substantial development permit under chapter 90.58 RCW, the prevailing party on appeal was the prevailing party or the substantially prevailing party before the shoreline[s] hearings board; and
(b) The prevailing party on appeal was the prevailing party or substantially prevailing party in all prior judicial proceedings.
(2) In addition to the prevailing party under subsection (1) of this section, the county, city, or town whose decision is on appeal is considered a prevailing party if its decision is upheld at superior court and on appeal.
[ 1995 c 347 s 718.]

Notes:

Finding—Severability—Part headings and table of contents not law—1995 c 347: See notes following RCW 36.70A.470.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 166 cases (12 in the last 5 years), 1997–2026 · leading case: Durland v. San Juan County
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Durland v. San Juan County (2014) wash · cites it 20× “5 The Court of Appeals in both Durland I and Durland II awarded Heinmiller attorney fees under RCW 4.84.370. We granted review of both Durland I and Durland II and consolidated the two cases.”
Watch v. Skagit County (2005) wash · cites it 20× “Does RCW 4.84.370, the statute awarding attorney fees and costs to the prevailing party at all levels, violate equal protection? III.”
Knight v. City of Yelm (2011) wash · cites it 24× “The court also awarded attorney fees *979 to Tahoma Terra and the City pursuant to RCW 4.84.370. The court affirmed Tahoma Terra's preliminary plat approval, reversed the superior court, and dismissed Knight's LUPA petition.”
Biggers v. City of Bainbridge Island (2007) wash · cites it 10× “¶15 The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court but ultimately denied the Biggerses’ request for attorney fees under RCW 4.84.370. Biggers v. City of Bainbridge Island, 124 Wn.”
Witt v. Port of Olympia (2005) washctapp · cites it 8× “Attorney Fees ¶14 The Port asks for attorney fees under RCW 4.84.370. Under that provision, a party who prevails in an appeal of a land use decision at the administrative and judicial level is entitled to an award of attorney fees incurred before the Court of Appeals.”
Witt v. Port of Olympia (2005) washctapp · cites it 8× “And Witt does not even argue that Hollingbery was one of the persons enumerated in the statute; instead, she asks this court to ignore the statutory language and follow her reasoning that she had a right to assume Hollingbery was the right person to serve.”
Gig Harbor Marina, Inc. v. City of Gig Harbor (1999) washctapp · cites it 23× “The Stearnses filed this appeal and the City now seeks attorney’s fees under RCW 4.84.370, which allows attorney’s fees in land use cases to petitioners who have substantially prevailed in front of the local government, the trial court, and the appellate court.”
Brown v. City of Seattle (2003) washctapp · cites it 13× “030 because another provision which governs the award of costs for appeals of land use decisions, RCW 4.84.370, bars the award of costs at the trial court level.”
Anderson v. Pierce County (1997) washctapp · cites it 7× “RPW Industries and Pierce County contend that (1) Buckley does not have standing to challenge the MDNS, and (2) they are entitled to reasonable attorney fees and costs under the Regulatory Reform Act, RCW 4.84.370. We affirm the decisions of the Hearing Examiner and deny the…”
Thurston County v. Cooper Point Ass'n (2002) wash · cites it 3× “Finally, we must determine whether the Respondents, other than the Board, are entitled to attorney fees pursuant to RCW 4.84.370. That statute provides that costs shall be awarded to the prevailing party or substantially prevailing party on appeal before .”
Pinecrest Homeowners Ass'n v. Glen A. Cloninger & Associates (2004) wash · cites it 4× “1 and RCW 4.84.370. Cloninger complied with RAP 18.”
Pinecrest Homeowners Ass'n v. GLEN A. CLONINGER & ASS'N (2004) wash · cites it 4× “1 and RCW 4.84.370. Cloninger complied with RAP 18.”
Show all 166 citing cases →
— Wash. Rev. Code § 4.84.370(1) — 81 cases
Durland v. San Juan County (2014) wash “5 The Court of Appeals in both Durland I and Durland II awarded Heinmiller attorney fees under RCW 4.84.370. We granted review of both Durland I and Durland II and consolidated the two cases.”
Biggers v. City of Bainbridge Island (2007) wash “¶15 The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court but ultimately denied the Biggerses’ request for attorney fees under RCW 4.84.370. Biggers v. City of Bainbridge Island, 124 Wn.”
Asche v. Bloomquist (2006) washctapp
Knight v. City of Yelm (2011) wash “The court also awarded attorney fees *979 to Tahoma Terra and the City pursuant to RCW 4.84.370. The court affirmed Tahoma Terra's preliminary plat approval, reversed the superior court, and dismissed Knight's LUPA petition.”
King County v. CENTRAL PUGET SOUND GROWTH (1999) wash
— Wash. Rev. Code § 4.84.370(1)(a) — 9 cases
Biggers v. City of Bainbridge Island (2007) wash “¶15 The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court but ultimately denied the Biggerses’ request for attorney fees under RCW 4.84.370. Biggers v. City of Bainbridge Island, 124 Wn.”
Pinecrest Homeowners Ass'n v. GLEN A. CLONINGER & ASS'N (2004) wash “1 and RCW 4.84.370. Cloninger complied with RAP 18.”
Biggers v. City of Bainbridge Island (2007) wash
Gregory And Janette Kovsky v. Robert Fanfant And Melanie Bishop (2018) washctapp
Gregory And Janette Kovsky v. Robert Fanfant And Melanie Bishop (2018) washctapp
— Wash. Rev. Code § 4.84.370(1)(b) — 8 cases
Biggers v. City of Bainbridge Island (2007) wash “¶15 The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court but ultimately denied the Biggerses’ request for attorney fees under RCW 4.84.370. Biggers v. City of Bainbridge Island, 124 Wn.”
Feil v. E. WASHINGTON GROWTH MGMT. HEARINGS (2011) wash
Ina Tateuchi v. City Of Bellevue (2020) washctapp
Guillen v. Contreras (2008) washctapp
Richards v. City of Pullman (2006) washctapp
— Wash. Rev. Code § 4.84.370(2) — 34 cases
Knight v. City of Yelm (2011) wash “The court also awarded attorney fees *979 to Tahoma Terra and the City pursuant to RCW 4.84.370. The court affirmed Tahoma Terra's preliminary plat approval, reversed the superior court, and dismissed Knight's LUPA petition.”
Durland v. San Juan County (2014) wash “5 The Court of Appeals in both Durland I and Durland II awarded Heinmiller attorney fees under RCW 4.84.370. We granted review of both Durland I and Durland II and consolidated the two cases.”
Witt v. Port of Olympia (2005) washctapp “Attorney Fees ¶14 The Port asks for attorney fees under RCW 4.84.370. Under that provision, a party who prevails in an appeal of a land use decision at the administrative and judicial level is entitled to an award of attorney fees incurred before the Court of Appeals.”
Conom v. Snohomish County (2005) wash
Conom v. Snohomish County (2005) wash
— Wash. Rev. Code § 4.84.370(l)(a) — 3 cases
Watch v. Skagit County (2005) wash “Does RCW 4.84.370, the statute awarding attorney fees and costs to the prevailing party at all levels, violate equal protection? III.”
Pinecrest Homeowners Ass'n v. Glen A. Cloninger & Associates (2004) wash “1 and RCW 4.84.370. Cloninger complied with RAP 18.”
Brown v. City of Seattle (2003) washctapp “030 because another provision which governs the award of costs for appeals of land use decisions, RCW 4.84.370, bars the award of costs at the trial court level.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 4.84.370(l)(b) — 4 cases
Guillen v. Contreras (2008) washctapp
Feil v. Eastern Washington Growth Management Hearings Board (2011) wash
Richards v. City of Pullman (2006) washctapp
Feil v. Eastern Washington Growth Management Hearings Board (2009) washctapp
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.