Revised Code of Washington
Wash. Rev. Code § 46.61.600 (2026)
Unattended motor vehicle
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov
JustiaTitle on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
(1) No person driving or in charge of a motor vehicle shall permit it to stand unattended without first stopping the engine, locking the ignition, removing the key and effectively setting the brake thereon and, when standing upon any perceptible grade, turning the front wheels to the curb or side of the highway.
(2) The most recent driver of a motor vehicle which the driver has left standing unattended, who learns that the vehicle has become set in motion and has struck another vehicle or property, or has caused injury to any person, shall comply with the requirements of:
(a) RCW 46.52.010 if his or her vehicle strikes an unattended vehicle or property adjacent to a public highway; or
(b) RCW 46.52.020 if his or her vehicle causes damage to an attended vehicle or other property or injury to any person.
(3) Any person failing to comply with subsection (2)(b) of this section shall be subject to the sanctions set forth in RCW 46.52.020.
Notes:
Effective date—1980 c 97: See note following RCW 46.52.020.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7
cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1970–2023 · leading case: Tae Kim v. Budget Rent A Car Sys., Inc., 15 P.3d 1283 (Wash. 2001).
Tae Kim v. Budget Rent A Car Sys., Inc., 15 P.3d 1283 (Wash. 2001). “Plaintiff’s final contention is that RCW 46.61.600 is evidence of the Legislature’s intent to create a tort obligation on the part of vehicle owners to not leave keys in the ignition of their automobile.”
Kim v. Budget Rent a Car Sys., Inc., 15 P.3d 1283 (Wash. 2001). “Plaintiff's final contention is that RCW 46.61.600 is evidence of the Legislature's intent to create a tort obligation on the part of vehicle owners to not leave keys in the ignition of their automobile.”
Pratt v. Thomas, 491 P.2d 1285 (Wash. 1971). “there was a liability imposed by statute, RCW 46.61.600; and 3. there was common-law liability.”
The City of Sunnyside v. Wendt, 755 P.2d 847 (Wash. Ct. App. 1988). “Wendt argues the most he could have been charged with was RCW 46.61.600, the unattended motor vehicle statute.”
State v. Woods, 475 P.2d 573 (Wash. Ct. App. 1970). “2 In June of 1968, ordinance 174 of the city of Mercer Island which adopted by reference RCW 46.61.600 made it a traffic offense to leave a motor vehicle unattended with the key in the ignition.”
Paul Adgar, Appellant/cross V Martin A. Dinsmore, Respondents/cross, 530 P.3d 236 (Wash. Ct. App. 2023). “4 Adgar also appears to argue that RCW 46.61.600 imposes a duty of care on LWD.”
Sims v. City of Seattle (W.D. Wash. 2023). “2001) 12 (“[RCW 46.61.600] is designed for the protection of the owner and for the protection of others in the 13 path of the vehicle if it should be put in motion by reason of having been insecurely parked.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 46.61.600(1) — 3 cases
Tae Kim v. Budget Rent A Car Sys., Inc., 15 P.3d 1283 (Wash. 2001). “Plaintiff’s final contention is that RCW 46.61.600 is evidence of the Legislature’s intent to create a tort obligation on the part of vehicle owners to not leave keys in the ignition of their automobile.”
Kim v. Budget Rent a Car Sys., Inc., 15 P.3d 1283 (Wash. 2001). “Plaintiff's final contention is that RCW 46.61.600 is evidence of the Legislature's intent to create a tort obligation on the part of vehicle owners to not leave keys in the ignition of their automobile.”
Sims v. City of Seattle (W.D. Wash. 2023). “2001) 12 (“[RCW 46.61.600] is designed for the protection of the owner and for the protection of others in the 13 path of the vehicle if it should be put in motion by reason of having been insecurely parked.”
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.