Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 42.17A.904 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

The provisions of this act are to be liberally construed to effectuate the policies and purposes of this act. In the event of conflict between the provisions of this act and any other act, the provisions of this act shall govern.

[ 1973 c 1 s 47 (Initiative Measure No. 276, approved November 7, 1972). Formerly RCW 42.17.920.]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 4 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 2016–2026 · leading case: Anderson v. Dep't of Soc. & Health Servs., Div. of Child Support, 384 P.3d 651 (Wash. Ct. App. 2016).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Anderson v. Dep't of Soc. & Health Servs., Div. of Child Support, 384 P.3d 651 (Wash. Ct. App. 2016). “920 (1973), recodified as RCW 42.17A.904; PAWS II, 125 Wn.2d at 261-62 .”

State Of Washington, V. Meta Platforms, Inc., 560 P.3d 217 (Wash. Ct. App. 2024). “001(11) (emphasis added); RCW 42.17A.904 (“The provisions of this act are to be liberally construed to effectuate the policies and purposes of this act.”

State v. Meta Platforms, Inc. (Wash. 2026). · cites it 2× “001; see also former RCW 42.17A.904 (1973). Meta argues that the superior court should have assessed a penalty for each request it failed to adequately respond to (12) rather than for each advertisement included in those requests (822).”

Wash. Pub. Emps. Ass'n v. Wash. State Ctr. for Childhood Deafness & Hearing Loss (Wash. 2019). “, 95262-1 RCW 42.17A.904). The requested name and birth date information at issue in this case is not exempt from disclosure under any statutory provision, A.”

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.