Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 47.12.080 (2026)

Sale or exchange of unused land

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

The secretary of transportation may transfer and convey to the United States, its agencies or instrumentalities, to any other state agency, to any county or city or port district of this state, or to any public utility company, any unused state-owned real property under the jurisdiction of the department of transportation when, in the judgment of the secretary of transportation and the attorney general, the transfer and conveyance is consistent with public interest. Whenever the secretary makes an agreement for any such transfer or conveyance, and the attorney general concurs therein, the secretary shall execute and deliver unto the grantee a deed of conveyance, easement, or other instrument, duly acknowledged, as shall be necessary to fulfill the terms of the aforesaid agreement. All moneys paid to the state of Washington under any of the provisions hereof shall be deposited in the motor vehicle fund.

[ 1984 c 7 s 121. Prior: 1977 ex.s. c 151 s 49; 1977 ex.s. c 78 s 5; 1975 1st ex.s. c 96 s 3; 1961 c 13 s 47.12.080; prior: 1945 c 127 s 1; Rem. Supp. 1945 s 6400-120.]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 4 cases, 2011–2013 · leading case: Freeman v. Gregoire, 256 P.3d 264 (Wash. 2011).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Freeman v. Gregoire, 256 P.3d 264 (Wash. 2011). · cites it 3× “063 (allowing sale of highway land when not needed for transportation purposes); RCW 47.12.080 (allowing transfer and conveyance of DOT land when in public interest); RCW 47.”

Freeman v. Gregoire, 171 Wash. 2d 316 (Wash. 2011). · cites it 2× “063 (allowing sale of highway land when not needed for transportation purposes); RCW 47.12.080 (allowing transfer and conveyance of DOT land when in public interest); RCW 47.”

Freeman v. State, 309 P.3d 437 (Wash. 2013). “” As an initial matter, the appellants raise in a footnote the question of whether the lease at issue is actually a de facto sale, in which case RCW 47.12.080 would apply. This claim appears to rely on a statement made by the respondents during oral arguments in Freeman I that…”

Freeman v. State (Wash. 2013). “" As an initial matter, the appellants raise in a footnote the question of whether the lease at issue is actually a de facto sale, in which case RCW 47.12.080 would apply. This claim appears to rely on a statement made by the respondents during oral arguments in Freeman I that…”

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.