Wash. Rev. Code » Title 42 · Chapter 42.56
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 42.56.100 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
Agencies shall adopt and enforce reasonable rules and regulations, and the office of the secretary of the senate and the office of the chief clerk of the house of representatives shall adopt reasonable procedures allowing for the time, resource, and personnel constraints associated with legislative sessions, consonant with the intent of this chapter to provide full public access to public records, to protect public records from damage or disorganization, and to prevent excessive interference with other essential functions of the agency, the office of the secretary of the senate, or the office of the chief clerk of the house of representatives. Such rules and regulations shall provide for the fullest assistance to inquirers and the most timely possible action on requests for information. Nothing in this section shall relieve agencies, the office of the secretary of the senate, and the office of the chief clerk of the house of representatives from honoring requests received by mail for copies of identifiable public records.
If a public record request is made at a time when such record exists but is scheduled for destruction in the near future, the agency, the office of the secretary of the senate, or the office of the chief clerk of the house of representatives shall retain possession of the record, and may not destroy or erase the record until the request is resolved.
[ 1995 c 397 s 13; 1992 c 139 s 4; 1975 1st ex.s. c 294 s 16; 1973 c 1 s 29 (Initiative Measure No. 276, approved November 7, 1972). Formerly RCW 42.17.290.]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 67 cases (13 in the last 5 years), 2008–2026 · leading case: Neighborhood All. of Spokane v. Spokane, 261 P.3d 119 (Wash. 2011).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Neighborhood All. of Spokane v. Spokane, 261 P.3d 119 (Wash. 2011). · cites it 5× “See RCW 42.56.100. Relevancy in a PRA action, then, includes why documents were withheld, destroyed, or even lost.”
Freedom Found. v. Dshs, 445 P.3d 971 (Wash. Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 6× “080 (2016), (3) any disparity in the timing of production between the Training Partnership and the Foundation was lawful, and (4) DSHS provided the fullest and most timely assistance to the Foundation and 1 RCW 42.”
Theodore Roosevelt Hikel, Jr. v. City Of Lynnwood, 389 P.3d 677 (Wash. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 4× “Hikel’s complaint cited RCW 42.56.100 and its requirement “to adopt and enforce reasonable rules and regulations” but made no argument or allegation about any failure to promulgate rules and described no claim based on inadequate rules in the section of the complaint labeled…”
Bldg. Indus. Ass'n v. Mccarthy, 218 P.3d 196 (Wash. Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 2× “" RCW 42.56.100 (emphasis added). That provision was not triggered under the facts of this case.”
Bldg. Indus. Ass'n v. McCarthy, 152 Wash. App. 720 (Wash. Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 2× “” RCW 42.56.100 (emphasis added). That provision was not triggered under the facts of this case.”
Fisher Broad.-Seattle TV LLC v. City of Seattle, 326 P.3d 688 (Wash. 2014). · cites it 2× “RCW 42.56.100; Neigh. All. of Spokane County v.”
O'NEILL v. City of Shoreline, 240 P.3d 1149 (Wash. 2010). · cites it 2× “" RCW 42.56.100. Here, the electronic version of the e-mail, including its embedded metadata, is a public record, so it could not be destroyed once Ms.”
O'Neill v. City of Shoreline, 170 Wash. 2d 138 (Wash. 2010). · cites it 2× “” RCW 42.56.100. Here, the electronic version of the e-mail, including its embedded metadata, is a public record, so it could not be destroyed once Ms.”
Andrews v. Washington State Patrol, 334 P.3d 94 (Wash. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 3× “¶1 RCW 42.56.100 requires that an agency responding to public records requests provide “the fullest assistance to inquirers and the most timely possible action on requests for information.”
Benton Cnty. v. Donna Zink, 361 P.3d 801 (Wash. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 3× “” RCW 42.56.100. This aim is accomplished by adoption and enforcement of reasonable rules, including rules to “prevent excessive interference with other essential functions of the agency.”
Resident Action Council v. Seattle Hous. Auth., 327 P.3d 600 (Wash. 2013). “RCW 42.56.100. The agency’s rules and regulations also must “provide for the fullest assistance to inquirers and the most timely possible action on requests for information.”
Yousoufian v. Off. of Ron Sims, 229 P.3d 735 (Wash. 2010). “[12] RCW 42.56.100 states that "rules and regulations shall provide for the fullest assistance to inquirers and the most timely possible action on requests for information.”
Show all 67 citing cases →
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.