Wash. Rev. Code » Title 41 · Chapter 41.26

Wash. Rev. Code § 41.26.270

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
*** CHANGE IN 2026 *** (SEE 2034-S2.SL) ***
The legislature of the state of Washington hereby declares that the relationship between members of the law enforcement officers' and firefighters' retirement system and their governmental employers is similar to that of workers to their employers and that the sure and certain relief granted by this chapter is desirable, and as beneficial to such law enforcement officers and firefighters as workers' compensation coverage is to persons covered by Title 51 RCW. The legislature further declares that removal of law enforcement officers and firefighters from workers' compensation coverage under Title 51 RCW necessitates the (1) continuance of sure and certain relief for personal injuries incurred in the course of employment or occupational disease, which the legislature finds to be accomplished by the provisions of this chapter and (2) protection for the governmental employer from actions at law; and to this end the legislature further declares that the benefits and remedies conferred by this chapter upon law enforcement officers and firefighters covered hereunder, shall be to the exclusion of any other remedy, proceeding, or compensation for personal injuries or sickness, caused by the governmental employer except as otherwise provided by this chapter; and to that end all civil actions and civil causes of actions by such law enforcement officers and firefighters against their governmental employers for personal injuries or sickness are hereby abolished, except as otherwise provided in this chapter.
[ 1989 c 12 s 13; 1987 c 185 s 13; 1985 c 102 s 4; 1971 ex.s. c 257 s 14.]

Notes:

Intent—Severability—1987 c 185: See notes following RCW 51.12.130.
Purpose—Retrospective application—1985 c 102: See notes following RCW 41.26.120.
Purpose—Severability—1971 ex.s. c 257: See notes following RCW 41.26.030.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 11 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1977–2023 · leading case: Flanigan v. Department of Labor & Industries
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Flanigan v. Department of Labor & Industries (1994) wash · cites it 4× “RCW 41.26.270. LEOFF also provides an exception to the Act's ban on legal action by allowing firefighters and law enforcement officers to seek additional compensation from their employers where the injury is due to the intentional or negligent act or omission of the employer.”
Gillis v. City of Walla Walla (1980) wash · cites it 9× “*195 As set forth in RCW 41.26.270, the declaration of policy respecting benefits for injury or death, the LEOFF system operates to grant employee members "sure and certain relief for injuries" and also to protect "the governmental employer from actions at law.”
Fray v. Spokane County (1998) wash · cites it 4× “[41] The Court looked to RCW 41.26.270, which expressly removed police officers and fire fighters from industrial insurance coverage, and RCW 41.”
Fray ex rel. Fray v. Spokane County (1998) wash · cites it 3× “41 The Court looked to RCW 41.26.270, which expressly removed police officers and fire fighters from industrial insurance coverage, and RCW 41.”
Taylor v. City of Redmond (1977) wash · cites it 3× “The case involves the application of RCW 41.26.270 and .280 of the Washington Law Enforcement Officers' and Fire Fighters' Retirement System Act (LEOFF), together with some consideration of RCW 51.”
Bickford v. City of Seattle (2001) washctapp · cites it 2× “Flanigan, an industrial insurance benefit case, cannot be read to overturn Gillis, or one that applies to the offset of LEOFF benefits under RCW 41.26.270. [9] The Flanigan decision disapproves of the homogenization of industrial insurance benefits with LEOFF disability benefits…”
Bickford v. City of Seattle (2001) washctapp · cites it 2× “Flanigan, an industrial insurance benefit case, cannot be read to overturn Gillis, or one that applies to the offset of LEOFF benefits under RCW 41.26.270. 10 The Flanigan decision disapproves of the homogenization of industrial insurance benefits with LEOFF disability benefits…”
Erik T. Salisbury, Et Ano, V. City Of Seattle, Et Ano (2023) washctapp · cites it 2× “281, which permits an injured officer or fire fighter to sue for “any excess damages”: If injury or death results to a member from the intentional or negligent act or omission of a member’s governmental employer, the member, the widow, widower, child, or dependent of the member…”
Elford v. City of Battle Ground (1997) washctapp “RCW 41.26.270. 2 The Industrial Insurance Act’s exclusive remedy provision provides that "[A]ll civil actions and civil causes of action for [employment related] injuries and all jurisdiction of the courts of the state over such causes are hereby abolished, except as in this…”
Estate Of Carl Murray, Wendy Murray, V City Of Vancouver (2018) washctapp · cites it 5× “RCW 41.26.270. Additionally, RCW 41.26.281 states, 7 No.”
Lance Ramsay, V. State Of Wa Department Of Transportation (2023) washctapp “3 In those same amendments, the legislature removed LEOFF members from coverage under the IIA and abolished all civil cause of action for personal injury against LEOFF members’ employers except those provided for in LEOFF.”
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.