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

Wash. Rev. Code § 46.61.210 (2026)

Operation of vehicles on approach of emergency vehicles or organ transport vehicles transporting a time urgent organ

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(1) Upon the immediate approach of an authorized emergency vehicle, or organ transport vehicle transporting a time urgent organ as defined in RCW 68.64.010, making use of audible and visual signals meeting the requirements of RCW 46.37.190, or of a police vehicle properly and lawfully making use of an audible signal only the driver of every other vehicle shall yield the right-of-way and shall immediately drive to a position parallel to, and as close as possible to, the right-hand edge or curb of the roadway clear of any intersection and shall stop and remain in such position until the authorized emergency vehicle or organ transport vehicle has passed, except when otherwise directed by a police officer.
(2) This section shall not operate to relieve the driver of an authorized emergency vehicle or organ transport vehicle from the duty to drive with due regard for the safety of all persons using the highway. To the greatest extent practicable, organ transport services as defined in RCW 18.73.030 shall notify the state patrol when an organ transport vehicle is operating under the provisions of this section.
[ 2023 c 290 s 6; 1965 ex.s. c 155 s 32.]

Notes:

Rules of court: Monetary penalty schedule—IRLJ 6.2.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 10 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1977–2022 · leading case: Brown v. Spokane Cnty. Fire Prot. Dist. No. 1, 668 P.2d 571 (Wash. 1983).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Brown v. Spokane Cnty. Fire Prot. Dist. No. 1, 668 P.2d 571 (Wash. 1983). · cites it 5× “035 and RCW 46.61.210. 1 *191 The district disputed any liability and contended Mr.”
State v. Weaver, 161 Wash. App. 58 (Wash. Ct. App. 2011). · cites it 28× “Trooper Pardue then cited *61 Weaver for, amongother infractions, failing to yield under RCW 46.61.210. 1 ¶4 Weaver contested the infraction and the district court found that she committed the infraction of failing to yield to an emergency vehicle.”
State v. Ritts, 973 P.2d 493 (Wash. Ct. App. 1999). · cites it 2× “190(5); RCW 46.61.210. However, violation of RCW 46.”
State v. Weaver, 248 P.3d 1116 (Wash. Ct. App. 2011). · cites it 30× “Trooper Pardue then cited Weaver for, among other infractions, failing to yield under RCW 46.61.210. [1] ¶ 4 Weaver contested the infraction and the District Court found that she committed the infraction of failing to yield to an emergency vehicle.”
Boyle v. Emerson, 561 P.2d 1110 (Wash. Ct. App. 1977). · cites it 2× “This statute, RCW 46.61.210, requires the operators of all other vehicles to be on the alert, and to immediately yield the right-of-way by driving *107 to a position parallel to, and as close as possible to, the right-hand edge or curb of the roadway clear of any intersection…”
Brown v. Fire Protec. Dist., 668 P.2d 571 (Wash. 1983). · cites it 5× “035 and RCW 46.61.210. [1] *191 The district disputed any liability and contended Mr.”
State v. Keltner, 9 P.3d 838 (Wash. Ct. App. 2000). · cites it 2× “Keltner was cited for: (1) failure to yield the right of way on approach of an emergency vehicle, in violation of RCW 46.61.210; and (2) failure to obey restrictive sign (high occupancy vehicle lane), in violation of RCW 46.”
State v. Keltner, 9 P.3d 838 (Wash. Ct. App. 2000). · cites it 2× “Keltner was cited for: (1) failure to yield the right of way on approach of an emergency vehicle, in violation of RCW 46.61.210; and (2) failure to obey restrictive sign (high occupancy vehicle lane), in violation of RCW 46.”
City of Lakewood v. Cheng, 279 P.3d 914 (Wash. Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 2× “055(3) and failure to yield to the right of an emergency vehicle in violation of RCW 46.61.210. After Cheng contested both infractions, the Lakewood Municipal Court found him guilty of the failure to yield infraction on June 15, 2009.”
State v. Donaldson, 510 P.3d 943 (Or. Ct. App. 2022). “Weaver, 161 Wash App 58, 248 P3d 1116 (2011) (involving RCW 46.61.210); Jackson v. State, 223 Ga App 27, 477 SE 2d 28 (1996) (involving OCGA § 40-6-74); and McFerrin v.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 46.61.210(1) — 5 cases
State v. Weaver, 161 Wash. App. 58 (Wash. Ct. App. 2011). “Trooper Pardue then cited *61 Weaver for, amongother infractions, failing to yield under RCW 46.61.210. 1 ¶4 Weaver contested the infraction and the district court found that she committed the infraction of failing to yield to an emergency vehicle.”
Brown v. Spokane Cnty. Fire Prot. Dist. No. 1, 668 P.2d 571 (Wash. 1983). “035 and RCW 46.61.210. 1 *191 The district disputed any liability and contended Mr.”
State v. Weaver, 248 P.3d 1116 (Wash. Ct. App. 2011). “Trooper Pardue then cited Weaver for, among other infractions, failing to yield under RCW 46.61.210. [1] ¶ 4 Weaver contested the infraction and the District Court found that she committed the infraction of failing to yield to an emergency vehicle.”
Boyle v. Emerson, 561 P.2d 1110 (Wash. Ct. App. 1977). “This statute, RCW 46.61.210, requires the operators of all other vehicles to be on the alert, and to immediately yield the right-of-way by driving *107 to a position parallel to, and as close as possible to, the right-hand edge or curb of the roadway clear of any intersection…”
Brown v. Fire Protec. Dist., 668 P.2d 571 (Wash. 1983). “035 and RCW 46.61.210. [1] *191 The district disputed any liability and contended Mr.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 46.61.210(2) — 2 cases
Brown v. Spokane Cnty. Fire Prot. Dist. No. 1, 668 P.2d 571 (Wash. 1983). “035 and RCW 46.61.210. 1 *191 The district disputed any liability and contended Mr.”
Brown v. Fire Protec. Dist., 668 P.2d 571 (Wash. 1983). “035 and RCW 46.61.210. [1] *191 The district disputed any liability and contended Mr.”
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.