Wash. Rev. Code » Title 47 · Chapter 47.52
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 47.52.137 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
Following the conclusion of such hearing the authority shall adopt a plan with such modifications, if any, it deems proper and necessary. Its findings and order shall be in writing and copies thereof shall be served by United States mail upon all persons having entered a written appearance at such hearing, and in the case of a state limited access facility, the county commissioners of the county affected and the mayor of the city or town affected. The authority shall also cause a resume of such plan to be published once each week for two weeks in one or more newspapers of general circulation within such county, city or town beginning not less than ten days after the mailing of such findings and order. Such determination by the authority shall become final within thirty days after such mailing unless a review is taken as hereinafter provided. In case of an appeal, the order shall be final as to all parties not appealing.
[ 1965 ex.s. c 75 s 4.]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8 cases, 1967–2001 · leading case: Leschi Improvement Council v. Washington State High. Comm'n, 525 P.2d 774 (Wash. 1974).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Leschi Improvement Council v. Washington State High. Comm'n, 525 P.2d 774 (Wash. 1974). · cites it 4× “Under SEPA, however, as applied to that act, far broader questions of environmental impact, identification of unavoidable adverse environmental effects, choices between long- and short-term environmental uses and identification of the commitment of resources are presented.”
Seattle Bldg. & Constr. Trades Council v. City of Seattle, 620 P.2d 82 (Wash. 1980). “In December of 1971, the city council filed an objection to the State's plan, as it was permitted to do under RCW 47.52.137, .139, and requested a hearing before a board of review.”
State v. Brannan, 530 P.2d 322 (Wash. 1975). · cites it 2× “Not only do the findings and order show that the statutory condition precedent was satisfied, the petitioners do not dispute that they were given notice and appeared at the hearing, and that a copy of the findings and order was mailed to them as provided by RCW 47.52.137. Under…”
Ault v. Washington State High. Comm'n, 462 P.2d 546 (Wash. 1969). · cites it 2× “June 17, 1968, the State Highway Commission issued its findings and order in accordance with the provisions of RCW 47.52.137. 1 They adopted the Highway Department’s *377 plan, with certain modifications, and set forth the reasons for not adopting the alternative proposed by the…”
Brighton v. Dep't of Transp., 109 Wash. App. 855 (Wash. Ct. App. 2001). “RCW 47.52.137 reads as follows: Following the conclusion of such hearing the authority shall adopt a plan with such modifications, if any, it deems proper and necessary.”
Brighton v. State Dept. of Transp., 38 P.3d 344 (Wash. Ct. App. 2001). “RCW 47.52.137 reads as follows: Following the conclusion of such hearing the authority shall adopt a plan with such modifications, if any, it deems proper and necessary.”
State v. Lauman, 490 P.2d 450 (Wash. Ct. App. 1971). “133 was held, and as contemplated by RCW 47.52.137, a limited access highway plan was approved.”
State Ex Rel. Duvall v. City Council of City of Seattle, 429 P.2d 235 (Wash. 1967). “75 § 4 (now RCW 47.52.137), which became effective on that date.”
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.