Wash. Rev. Code » Title 46 · Chapter 46.61
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 46.61.190 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(1) Preferential right-of-way may be indicated by stop signs or yield signs as authorized in RCW 47.36.110.
(2)(a) Except when directed to proceed by a duly authorized flagger, or a police officer, or a firefighter vested by law with authority to direct, control, or regulate traffic, every driver of a vehicle approaching a stop sign shall stop except as provided in (b) of this subsection at a clearly marked stop line, but if none, before entering a marked crosswalk on the near side of the intersection or, if none, then at the point nearest the intersecting roadway where the driver has a view of approaching traffic on the intersecting roadway before entering the roadway, and after having stopped shall yield the right-of-way to any vehicle in the intersection or approaching on another roadway so closely as to constitute an immediate hazard during the time when such driver is moving across or within the intersection or junction of roadways.
(b)(i) With the exception of (b)(ii) and (iii) of this subsection, a person operating a bicycle approaching a stop sign shall either:
(A) Follow the requirements for approaching a stop sign as specified in (a) of this subsection; or
(B) Follow the requirements for approaching a yield sign as specified in subsection (3) of this section.
(ii) A person operating a bicycle approaching a stop sign located at a highway grade crossing of a railroad must follow the requirements of RCW 46.61.345.
(iii) A person operating a bicycle approaching a "stop" signal in use by a school bus, as required under RCW 46.37.190, must follow the requirements of RCW 46.61.370.
(3) The driver of a vehicle approaching a yield sign shall in obedience to such sign slow down to a speed reasonable for the existing conditions and if required for safety to stop, shall stop at a clearly marked stop line, but if none, before entering a marked crosswalk on the near side of the intersection or if none, then at the point nearest the intersecting roadway where the driver has a view of approaching traffic on the intersecting roadway before entering the roadway, and then after slowing or stopping, the driver shall yield the right-of-way to any vehicle in the intersection or approaching on another roadway so closely as to constitute an immediate hazard during the time such driver is moving across or within the intersection or junction of roadways: PROVIDED, That if such a driver is involved in a collision with a vehicle in the intersection or junction of roadways, after driving past a yield sign without stopping, such collision shall be deemed prima facie evidence of the driver's failure to yield right-of-way.
(4)(a) When right-of-way has not been yielded in accordance with this section to a vehicle that is a vulnerable user of a public way, a driver of a motor vehicle found to be in violation of this section must be assessed an additional fine equal to the base penalty assessed under RCW 46.63.110(3). This fine may not be waived, reduced, or suspended, unless the court finds the offender to be indigent, and is not subject to the additional fees and assessments that the base penalty for this violation is subject to under RCW 2.68.040, 3.62.090, and 46.63.110.
(b) For the purposes of this section, "vulnerable user of a public way" has the same meaning as provided in RCW 46.61.5259.
(5) The additional fine imposed under subsection (4) of this section must be deposited into the vulnerable roadway user education account created in RCW 46.61.145.
[ 2023 c 471 s 8; 2020 c 66 s 2; 2019 c 403 s 7; 2000 c 239 s 5; 1975 c 62 s 27; 1965 ex.s. c 155 s 30.]

Notes:

Rules of court: Monetary penalty schedule—IRLJ 6.2.
Effective date—2023 c 471: See note following RCW 46.61.5259.
Effective date—2020 c 66: See note following RCW 46.61.050.
Finding—Intent—Effective date—2019 c 403: See notes following RCW 46.04.071.
Captions not law—2000 c 239: See note following RCW 49.17.350.
Severability—1975 c 62: See note following RCW 36.75.010.
Stop signs, "Yield" signs—Duties of persons using highway: RCW 47.36.110.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 18 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1967–2025 · leading case: Pudmaroff v. Allen, 977 P.2d 574 (Wash. 1999).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Pudmaroff v. Allen, 977 P.2d 574 (Wash. 1999). · cites it 4× “755 are subject to the rules of the road, Pudmaroff failed to comply with RCW 46.61.190(2) which requires a vehicle approaching a stop sign at an intersection of roadways to yield the right of way to approaching traffic.”
Pudmaroff v. Allen, 138 Wash. 2d 55 (Wash. 1999). · cites it 4× “755 are subject to the rules of the road, Pudmaroff failed to comply with RCW 46.61.190(2) which requires a vehicle approaching a stop sign at an intersection of roadways to yield the right of way to approaching traffic.”
Hester v. Watson, 448 P.2d 320 (Wash. 1968). · cites it 6× “RCW 46.61.190 (2). This testimony is contrary to statements which the Hesters and the investigating officer testified Mr.”
Radosevich v. Cnty. Commissioners, 476 P.2d 705 (Wash. Ct. App. 1970). · cites it 5× “A yield sign with an arrow is admittedly not authorized by the Manual for Signing and differs from a “yield” sign and “yield ahead” sign described in the manual.”
Poston v. Mathers, 462 P.2d 222 (Wash. 1969). · cites it 2× “]" Respondent Mathers' duty is expressed in RCW 46.61.190(2): "(2) Except when directed to proceed by a police officer or traffic-control signal, every driver of a vehicle approaching a stop intersection indicated by a stop sign shall stop as required by RCW 46.”
Zahn v. Arbelo, 434 P.2d 570 (Wash. 1967). · cites it 2× “I cannot agree with this method of deciding these cases. There is no equivocation in the duties imposed by the legislature upon the disfavored driver at a controlled intersection.”
Foster v. Bylund, 503 P.2d 1087 (Wash. Ct. App. 1972). · cites it 2× “The plaintiff’s standard of care is defined by RCW 46.61.190(2) and RCW 46.61.360(2). RCW 46.”
Stevens v. State, 484 P.2d 467 (Wash. Ct. App. 1971). “” 4 See RCW 46.61.190 as to the obligation of a disfavored driver to yield the right-of-way at an intersection.”
Pudmaroff v. Allen, 951 P.2d 335 (Wash. Ct. App. 1998). “…6303, Final 1990 Legislative Report, 51st Washington State Legislature 148. 78 Wn.2d 193, 199 , 470 P.2d 544 (1970). RCW 46.61.190(2).”
McGough v. City of Edmonds, 460 P.2d 302 (Wash. Ct. App. 1969). · cites it 2× “RCW 46.61.190 provides: (3) The driver of a vehicle approaching a yield sign shall in obedience to such sign slow down to a speed reasonable for the existing conditions and shall yield the right of way to any vehicle in the intersection or approaching on another highway so…”
Sadler v. Wagner, 486 P.2d 330 (Wash. Ct. App. 1971). · cites it 2× “Although the statutory duties were changed in RCW 46.61.190, the quotations we rely upon from those cases continue to be the law of this state.”
Krause v. McIntosh, 562 P.2d 662 (Wash. Ct. App. 1977). “Since the administrator failed to present any substantial evidence that the accident would not have occurred if the decedent had not pulled out onto the arterial as he did, the trial court correctly determined that the estate was liable as a matter of law.”
Show all 18 citing cases →
— Wash. Rev. Code § 46.61.190(2) — 10 cases
Pudmaroff v. Allen, 977 P.2d 574 (Wash. 1999). “755 are subject to the rules of the road, Pudmaroff failed to comply with RCW 46.61.190(2) which requires a vehicle approaching a stop sign at an intersection of roadways to yield the right of way to approaching traffic.”
Pudmaroff v. Allen, 138 Wash. 2d 55 (Wash. 1999). “755 are subject to the rules of the road, Pudmaroff failed to comply with RCW 46.61.190(2) which requires a vehicle approaching a stop sign at an intersection of roadways to yield the right of way to approaching traffic.”
Hester v. Watson, 448 P.2d 320 (Wash. 1968). “RCW 46.61.190 (2). This testimony is contrary to statements which the Hesters and the investigating officer testified Mr.”
Poston v. Mathers, 462 P.2d 222 (Wash. 1969). “]" Respondent Mathers' duty is expressed in RCW 46.61.190(2): "(2) Except when directed to proceed by a police officer or traffic-control signal, every driver of a vehicle approaching a stop intersection indicated by a stop sign shall stop as required by RCW 46.”
Foster v. Bylund, 503 P.2d 1087 (Wash. Ct. App. 1972). “The plaintiff’s standard of care is defined by RCW 46.61.190(2) and RCW 46.61.360(2). RCW 46.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 46.61.190(2)(a) — 2 cases
Geiger v. United States (W.D. Wash. 2021).
Lidstrom v. Scotlynn Commodities Inc (E.D. Wash. 2025).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 46.61.190(3) — 1 case
Madelynn M. Tapken v. Spokane Cnty. (Wash. Ct. App. 2016).
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.