Wash. Rev. Code » Title 48 · Chapter 48.29
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 48.29.020 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
A title insurer is not entitled to have a certificate of authority unless:
(1) It is a stock corporation;
(2) It owns or leases and maintains a complete set of tract indexes of the county in this state in which its principal office is located; and
(3) It has and maintains the capital and surplus requirements set forth in RCW 48.05.340.
[ 2005 c 223 s 15; 1990 c 76 s 1; 1955 c 86 s 12; 1947 c 79 s .29.02; Rem. Supp. 1947 s 45.29.02.]

Notes:

Effective date—Supervision of transfers—1955 c 86: See notes following RCW 48.05.080.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1976–2024 · leading case: Chicago Title Ins. v. Off. of the Ins. Comm'r, 309 P.3d 372 (Wash. 2013).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Chicago Title Ins. v. Off. of the Ins. Comm'r, 309 P.3d 372 (Wash. 2013). · cites it 3× “RCW 48.29.020(2), .040(1). A title company can satisfy this requirement by retaining a “duly authorized agent” with a complete set of tract indexes in a county where it transacts business.”
Fid. Title Co. v. Dep't of Revenue, 745 P.2d 530 (Wash. Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 5× “To receive a certificate of authority from the insurance commissioner, a title insurer must comply with RCW 48.29.020. 2 In practice, the requirement that the insurer own a title plant (RCW 48.”
Shotwell v. Transamerica Title Ins., 558 P.2d 1359 (Wash. Ct. App. 1976). “RCW 48.29.020 and .040. Thus, we know, that in this jurisdiction .”
Pac. Title, Inc. v. Pioneer Nat'l Title Ins., 658 P.2d 684 (Wash. Ct. App. 1983). “See RCW 48.29.020(2) and RCW 48.29.040. Pacific cites authority stating title insurance is not truly "insurance" but is in the nature of a guaranty or warranty.”
Chicago Title Ins. v. Off. of the Ins. Comm'r, 271 P.3d 373 (Wash. Ct. App. 2012). “This arrangement is beneficial to both small and larger insurance companies because RCW 48.29.020(3) requires that title insurers maintain sufficient capital.”
Chi. Title Ins. Co. v. Off. of Ins. Comm'r (Wash. 2013). · cites it 3× “(AR) at 469, 514. The Washington Insurance Code requires a title insurance company to own, lease, or maintain a complete set of tract indexes in every county where it transacts business.”
James Cherberg & Nan Cherberg, V. Fid. Nat'l Title Ins. Co. (Wash. Ct. App. 2024). “85749-5-I/22 Wn.2d at 125-26. “The Washington Insurance Code requires a title insurance company to own, lease, or maintain a complete set of tract indexes in every county where it transacts business.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 48.29.020(2) — 5 cases
Chicago Title Ins. v. Off. of the Ins. Comm'r, 309 P.3d 372 (Wash. 2013). “RCW 48.29.020(2), .040(1). A title company can satisfy this requirement by retaining a “duly authorized agent” with a complete set of tract indexes in a county where it transacts business.”
Fid. Title Co. v. Dep't of Revenue, 745 P.2d 530 (Wash. Ct. App. 1987). “To receive a certificate of authority from the insurance commissioner, a title insurer must comply with RCW 48.29.020. 2 In practice, the requirement that the insurer own a title plant (RCW 48.”
Pac. Title, Inc. v. Pioneer Nat'l Title Ins., 658 P.2d 684 (Wash. Ct. App. 1983). “See RCW 48.29.020(2) and RCW 48.29.040. Pacific cites authority stating title insurance is not truly "insurance" but is in the nature of a guaranty or warranty.”
James Cherberg & Nan Cherberg, V. Fid. Nat'l Title Ins. Co. (Wash. Ct. App. 2024). “85749-5-I/22 Wn.2d at 125-26. “The Washington Insurance Code requires a title insurance company to own, lease, or maintain a complete set of tract indexes in every county where it transacts business.”
Chi. Title Ins. Co. v. Off. of Ins. Comm'r (Wash. 2013). “(AR) at 469, 514. The Washington Insurance Code requires a title insurance company to own, lease, or maintain a complete set of tract indexes in every county where it transacts business.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 48.29.020(3) — 4 cases
Chicago Title Ins. v. Off. of the Ins. Comm'r, 309 P.3d 372 (Wash. 2013). “RCW 48.29.020(2), .040(1). A title company can satisfy this requirement by retaining a “duly authorized agent” with a complete set of tract indexes in a county where it transacts business.”
Fid. Title Co. v. Dep't of Revenue, 745 P.2d 530 (Wash. Ct. App. 1987). “To receive a certificate of authority from the insurance commissioner, a title insurer must comply with RCW 48.29.020. 2 In practice, the requirement that the insurer own a title plant (RCW 48.”
Chicago Title Ins. v. Off. of the Ins. Comm'r, 271 P.3d 373 (Wash. Ct. App. 2012). “This arrangement is beneficial to both small and larger insurance companies because RCW 48.29.020(3) requires that title insurers maintain sufficient capital.”
Chi. Title Ins. Co. v. Off. of Ins. Comm'r (Wash. 2013). “(AR) at 469, 514. The Washington Insurance Code requires a title insurance company to own, lease, or maintain a complete set of tract indexes in every county where it transacts business.”
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.