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

Wash. Rev. Code § 46.61.240 (2026)

Crossing at other than crosswalks

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(1) Every pedestrian or personal delivery device crossing a roadway at any point other than within a marked crosswalk or within an unmarked crosswalk at an intersection shall yield the right-of-way to all vehicles upon the roadway.
(2) Where curb ramps exist at or adjacent to intersections or at marked crosswalks in other locations, persons with disabilities or personal delivery devices may enter the roadway from the curb ramps and cross the roadway within or as closely as practicable to the crosswalk. All other pedestrian rights and duties as defined elsewhere in this chapter remain applicable.
(3) Any pedestrian crossing a roadway at a point where a pedestrian tunnel or overhead pedestrian crossing has been provided shall yield the right-of-way to all vehicles upon the roadway.
(4) Between adjacent intersections at which traffic-control signals are in operation pedestrians shall not cross at any place except in a marked crosswalk.
(5) No pedestrian or personal delivery device shall cross a roadway intersection diagonally unless authorized by official traffic-control devices; and, when authorized to cross diagonally, pedestrians and personal delivery devices shall cross only in accordance with the official traffic-control devices pertaining to such crossing movements.
(6) No pedestrian or personal delivery device shall cross a roadway at an unmarked crosswalk where an official sign prohibits such crossing.
(7) This section does not apply on a shared street as defined in RCW 46.61.197.
[ 2025 c 300 s 5; 2019 c 214 s 13; 1990 c 241 s 5; 1965 ex.s. c 155 s 35.]

Notes:

Rules of court: Monetary penalty schedule—IRLJ 6.2.
Effective date—2019 c 214: See note following RCW 46.75.010.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 13 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1970–2025 · leading case: State v. Barber, 823 P.2d 1068 (Wash. 1992).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Barber, 823 P.2d 1068 (Wash. 1992). · cites it 2× “[6] See former RCW 46.61.240 (Laws of 1965, 1st Ex. Sess.”
Stewart v. State, 597 P.2d 101 (Wash. 1979). “28 of the duty of a pedestrian is different from that set by statute, RCW 46.61.240(1), which reads: Every pedestrian crossing a roadway at any point other than within a marked crosswalk or within an unmarked crosswalk at an intersection shall yield the right of way to all…”
Xiao Ping Chen v. City of Seattle, 223 P.3d 1230 (Wash. Ct. App. 2009). “That the law directs pedestrians to use crosswalks can be inferred from the lack of priority given to pedestrians who cross at points other than crosswalks: "Every pedestrian crossing a roadway at any point other than within a marked crosswalk or within an unmarked crosswalk at…”
Xiao Ping Chen v. City of Seattle, 153 Wash. App. 890 (Wash. Ct. App. 2009). “That the law directs pedestrians to use crosswalks can be inferred from the lack of priority given to pedestrians who cross at points other than crosswalks: “Every pedestrian crossing a roadway at any point other than within a marked crosswalk or within an unmarked crosswalk at…”
Dailey v. Lange, 578 P.2d 1322 (Wash. Ct. App. 1978). · cites it 2× “The Bradley court held that Bradley was not a pedestrian within the purview of RCW 46.61.240(1), 1 who is required to "yield the right of way to all vehicles upon the roadway," and was under a duty only to exercise reasonable care for his own safety.”
Bradley v. Maurer, 560 P.2d 719 (Wash. Ct. App. 1977). “Both instructions are drawn from RCW 46.61.240, which requires pedestrians crossing a roadway not at a crosswalk to yield the right-of-way to any vehicles.”
State v. Greene, 983 P.2d 1190 (Wash. Ct. App. 1999). “” RCW 46.61.240. Like Title 46, the municipal code defines jaywalking as a traffic infraction, not as a criminal offense.”
Zook v. Baier, 514 P.2d 923 (Wash. Ct. App. 1973). “” These instructions were based upon RCW 46.61.240 and 46.61.250. The court further informed the jury: One is charged with the duty of seeing that which he would have seen had he been exercising ordinary care.”
Kiemele v. Bryan, 476 P.2d 141 (Wash. Ct. App. 1970). “2 This instruction was taken from RCW 46.61.240 and RCW 46.61.245 and is not challenged for its content.”
Coleman v. Altman, 497 P.2d 1338 (Wash. Ct. App. 1972). “Coleman was not within an unmarked crosswalk at the intersection of Second Street and Bowen Street, she was required by RCW 46.61.240(1) to yield the right-of-way to all vehicles and her failure to yield the right-of-way to the Altman automobile would violate the provisions of…”
Deborah Stenzel v. Daniil Dumbrava (Wash. Ct. App. 2025). · cites it 3× “RCW 46.61.240. RCW 46.61.240(4) prohibits a pedestrian from crossing a road at any place other than a marked crosswalk between adjacent intersections, both of which maintain traffic control signals.”
State of Washington v. J.Y.A.-V. (Wash. Ct. App. 2021). “5 A slightly different version of the statute was in effect at the time of the stop, but the changes involve sidewalk accessibility, which is not pertinent here.”
Show all 13 citing cases →
— Wash. Rev. Code § 46.61.240(1) — 5 cases
Stewart v. State, 597 P.2d 101 (Wash. 1979). “28 of the duty of a pedestrian is different from that set by statute, RCW 46.61.240(1), which reads: Every pedestrian crossing a roadway at any point other than within a marked crosswalk or within an unmarked crosswalk at an intersection shall yield the right of way to all…”
Xiao Ping Chen v. City of Seattle, 153 Wash. App. 890 (Wash. Ct. App. 2009). “That the law directs pedestrians to use crosswalks can be inferred from the lack of priority given to pedestrians who cross at points other than crosswalks: “Every pedestrian crossing a roadway at any point other than within a marked crosswalk or within an unmarked crosswalk at…”
Dailey v. Lange, 578 P.2d 1322 (Wash. Ct. App. 1978). “The Bradley court held that Bradley was not a pedestrian within the purview of RCW 46.61.240(1), 1 who is required to "yield the right of way to all vehicles upon the roadway," and was under a duty only to exercise reasonable care for his own safety.”
Coleman v. Altman, 497 P.2d 1338 (Wash. Ct. App. 1972). “Coleman was not within an unmarked crosswalk at the intersection of Second Street and Bowen Street, she was required by RCW 46.61.240(1) to yield the right-of-way to all vehicles and her failure to yield the right-of-way to the Altman automobile would violate the provisions of…”
Sigrid Perez, V. City Of Seattle (Wash. Ct. App. 2024).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 46.61.240(4) — 1 case
Deborah Stenzel v. Daniil Dumbrava (Wash. Ct. App. 2025). “RCW 46.61.240. RCW 46.61.240(4) prohibits a pedestrian from crossing a road at any place other than a marked crosswalk between adjacent intersections, both of which maintain traffic control signals.”
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.