Wash. Rev. Code » Title 42 · Chapter 42.20
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 42.20.100 (2026)

Failure of duty by public officer a misdemeanor

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
Whenever any duty is enjoined by law upon any public officer or other person holding any public trust or employment, their wilful neglect to perform such duty, except where otherwise specially provided for, shall be a misdemeanor.
[ 1909 c 249 s 16; RRS s 2268. Prior: Code 1881 s 889; 1854 p 90 s 82.]

Notes:

Official misconduct by public servant: RCW 9A.80.010.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 11 cases (5 in the last 5 years), 1963–2024 · leading case: State v. Twitchell, 378 P.2d 444 (Wash. 1963).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Twitchell, 378 P.2d 444 (Wash. 1963). · cites it 2× “The crime of wilful neglect of duty is defined in RCW 42.20.100: "Whenever any duty is enjoined by law upon any public officer or other person holding any public trust or employment, their wilful neglect to perform such duty, except where otherwise specially provided for, shall…”
State v. Liewer, 829 P.2d 236 (Wash. Ct. App. 1992). · cites it 9× “010; and failure of duty by a public officer pursuant to RCW 42.20.100. RCW 9A.68.010(l)(b) reads as follows: (1) A person is guilty of bribery, if: (b) Being a public servant, he requests, accepts, or agrees to accept any pecuniary benefit pursuant to an agreement or…”
Issel v. State, 694 P.2d 34 (Wash. Ct. App. 1984). “010 and willful neglect of duty under RCW 42.20.100. The basis for the charges was Mr.”
Brooks Jr v. Ballard (E.D. Wash. 2024). · cites it 4× “18 RCW 42.20.100. Plaintiff claims that the incident involving GCSO Sheriff Drew 19 Hyer (discussed supra) constitutes a failure of duty by a public officer pursuant to 20 RCW 42.”
Charles Hause v. Spokane Cnty. (Wash. Ct. App. 2024). · cites it 2× “Hause emphasizes that a public employee bears a heightened duty to comply with the law because RCW 42.20.100 creates a misdemeanor for an official to willfully neglect his duties.”
Hart v. McDermott (W.D. Wash. 2023). · cites it 2× “) Fourth, Plaintiffs allege that 7 McDermott and Weyrich violated RCW 42.20.100 by conducting official actions without an 8 official bond in place and that this caused a vacancy under RCW 42.”
Palmer D. Strand, et ux v. Bd. of Tax Appeals (Wash. Ct. App. 2019). “Their petition explained they petitioned the court “because the BTA has failed in its duty (RCW 42.20.100) to provide the Strands a complete administrative real property appeal pursuant to RCW 84.”
State Of Washington v. Forrest Amos (Wash. Ct. App. 2020). “5 RCW 42.20.100 states that a public officer’s willful neglect to perform their duty is a misdemeanor.”
Zayas v. Dep't of Child. Youth & Families (W.D. Wash. 2021). “12 § 242, RCW 42.20.100, and intentional infliction of emotional distress claims.”
Zayas v. Dep't of Child. Youth & Families (W.D. Wash. 2022). “§ 242 , RCW 42.20.100, and intentional 6 infliction of emotional distress claims with prejudice and without leave to amend; and 7 (3) dismissed Ms.”
State v. Torgeson, 573 P.2d 817 (Wash. Ct. App. 1978). · cites it 2× “) RCW 42.20.100. The State contends that both because of Torgeson's common-law fiduciary responsibilities and by the express terms of RCW 36.”
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.