Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 42.52.500 (2026)

Optional hearings by administrative law judge

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
If an ethics board finds that there is reasonable cause to believe that a violation has occurred, the board shall consider the possibility of the alleged violator having to pay a total amount of penalty and costs of more than five hundred dollars. Based on such consideration, the board may give the person who is the subject of the complaint the option to have an administrative law judge conduct the hearing and rule on procedural and evidentiary matters. The board may also, on its own initiative, provide for retaining an administrative law judge. An ethics board may not require total payment of more than five hundred dollars in penalty and costs in any case where an administrative law judge is not used and the board did not give such option to the person who is the subject of the complaint.
[ 1994 c 154 s 220.]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1 case (1 in the last 5 years), 2025–2025 · leading case: Brady Horenstein v. Exec. Ethics Bd. (Wash. Ct. App. 2025).
Brady Horenstein v. Exec. Ethics Bd. (Wash. Ct. App. 2025). “Various provisions in the EPSA provide certain protections for state employees; however, those relate to actions following a reasonable cause determination.”
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.