Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 42.08.030 (2025)

Leave of court required

✓ laws through the 2025 session: 2026 session laws are not yet included
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
Before an action can be commenced by a plaintiff, other than the state, or the municipal or public corporation named in the bond, leave shall be obtained of the court or judge thereof where the action is triable. Such leave shall be granted upon the production of a certified copy of the bond and an affidavit of the plaintiff, or some person in his or her behalf, showing the delinquency. But if the matter set forth in his or her affidavit be such that, if true, the party applying would clearly not be entitled to recover in the action, the leave shall not be granted. If it does not appear from the complaint that the leave herein provided for has been granted, the defendant, on motion, shall be entitled to judgment of nonsuit; if it does, the defendant may controvert the allegation, and if the issue be found in his or her favor, judgment shall be given accordingly.
[ 2012 c 117 s 96; Code 1881 s 654; 1877 p 136 s 657; 1869 p 152 s 594; RRS s 960.]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 2023–2024 · leading case: Dashiell v. Stevens Cnty., No. 2:23-cv-00239 (E.D. Wash. Sept. 30, 2024).
Dashiell v. Stevens Cnty., No. 2:23-cv-00239 (E.D. Wash. Sept. 30, 2024). · cites it 2× “RCW 42.08.030. In contrast, special 17 authorization is provided by RCW 42.”
Hart v. Wesen, No. 2:23-cv-00309 (W.D. Wash. May 18, 2023). · cites it 2× “020 20 and RCW 42.08.030 respectively. (Complaint at 5-6, 7.”
Hart v. McDermott, No. 2:23-cv-00503 (W.D. Wash. Aug. 31, 2023). “) 9 Lastly, Plaintiffs seek leave of court to file their bond-related claims under RCW 42.08.030. (Id. 10 ¶¶ 54-55.) 11 Defendants ask the Court to take judicial notice of prior state court proceedings Plaintiffs 12 filed in Snohomish County Superior Court against Skagit County…”
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.