Wash. Rev. Code » Title 42 · Chapter 42.30
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 42.30.130 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
Any person may commence an action either by mandamus or injunction for the purpose of stopping violations or preventing threatened violations of this chapter by members of a governing body.
[ 1971 ex.s. c 250 s 13.]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1978–2026 · leading case: Arthur West v. Seattle Port Comm'n, 380 P.3d 82 (Wash. Ct. App. 2016).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Arthur West v. Seattle Port Comm'n, 380 P.3d 82 (Wash. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 2× “” RCW 42.30.130. And “[a]ny person” may bring an action to enforce civil penalties against members of a governing body who attend meetings in violation of the OPMA.”
Lopp v. Peninsula Sch. Dist. No. 401, 585 P.2d 801 (Wash. 1978). · cites it 3× “Appellant brought this suit pursuant to RCW 42.30.130 to enjoin and otherwise prohibit the sale of 9.”
Refai v. Cent. Washington Univ., 742 P.2d 137 (Wash. Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 4× “Any person may commence an action either by mandamus or injunction for the purpose of stopping violations or preventing threatened violations of this chapter by members of a governing body. (Italics mine.”
Donna Zink & Jeff Zink v. City of Mesa, 487 P.3d 902 (Wash. Ct. App. 2021). · cites it 2× “City of Mesa ANALYSIS Open Public Meetings Act The OPMA provides “[a]ll meetings of the governing body of a public agency shall be open and public and all persons shall be permitted to attend any meeting of the governing body of a public agency, except as otherwise provided in…”
Loeffelholz v. Citizens for Leaders With Ethics & Acct. Now, 82 P.3d 1199 (Wash. Ct. App. 2004). “RCW 42.30.130. See RCW 42.30.020(2); Salmon For All, 118 Wn.”
Estey v. Dempsey, 707 P.2d 1338 (Wash. 1985). · cites it 2× “" RCW 42.30.130. [4] RCW 42.30.020(3) has been amended effective July 28, 1985, as follows: (3) "Action" means the transaction of the official business of a public agency by a governing body including but not limited to receipt of public testimony, deliberations, discussions,…”
R.L. McFarland v. Gregory A. Tompkins, 567 P.3d 1128 (Wash. Ct. App. 2025). · cites it 10× “RCW 42.30.030. RCW 42.30.080 requires advance notice of an agenda for a special meeting.”
Arthur West v. Pierce Cnty. Council, 391 P.3d 592 (Wash. Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 4× “The superior court granted the Council’s motion for summary judgment.”
Loeffelholz v. Citizens for Leaders, 82 P.3d 1199 (Wash. Ct. App. 2004). “[117] RCW 42.30.130. [118] See RCW 42.30.020(2); Salmon for All v.”
Protect the Peninsula's Future v. Clallam Cnty., 833 P.2d 406 (Wash. Ct. App. 1992). “RCW 42.30.130 provides that any person may commence an action for an injunction to (1) stop violations or (2) prevent threatened violations of the act.”
Arthur West, V. City Of Burien (Wash. Ct. App. 2026). “Remedies for violating the OPMA include mandamus or injunction as provided in RCW 42.30.130, voidance of actions as provided in RCW 42.”
Citizens All., App. v. San Juan Cnty., Resps. (Wash. Ct. App. 2014). “120(2) (attorney fee award); RCW 42.30.130 (injunction). Thus, it is not appropriate to graft a knowledge requirement onto the test for overcoming summary judgment where civil penalties are not at issue.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 42.30.130(4) — 1 case
R.L. McFarland v. Gregory A. Tompkins, 567 P.3d 1128 (Wash. Ct. App. 2025). “RCW 42.30.030. RCW 42.30.080 requires advance notice of an agenda for a special meeting.”
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.