Wash. Rev. Code » Title 48 · Chapter 48.99
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 48.99.080 (2026)

Severability—Uniformity of interpretation

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(1) If any provision of this chapter or the application thereof to any person or circumstances is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications of the chapter which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this end the provisions of this chapter are declared to be severable.
(2) This uniform insurers liquidation act shall be so interpreted and construed as to effectuate its general purpose to make uniform the law of those states that enact it. To the extent that its provisions, when applicable, conflict with provisions of chapter 48.31 RCW, the provisions of this chapter shall control.
[ 1993 c 462 s 80; 1947 c 79 s .31.18; Rem. Supp. 1947 s 45.31.18. Formerly RCW 48.31.180.]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases, 2004–2004 · leading case: Olivine Corp. v. United Capitol Ins., 92 P.3d 273 (Wash. Ct. App. 2004).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Olivine Corp. v. United Capitol Ins., 92 P.3d 273 (Wash. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 2× “RCW 48.99.080(1) is Washington’s severability provision, and Illinois has no similar provision.”
Olivine Corp. v. United Capitol Ins. Co., 92 P.3d 273 (Wash. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 2× “RCW 48.99.080(1) is Washington's severability provision, and Illinois has no similar provision.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 48.99.080(1) — 2 cases
Olivine Corp. v. United Capitol Ins., 92 P.3d 273 (Wash. Ct. App. 2004). “RCW 48.99.080(1) is Washington’s severability provision, and Illinois has no similar provision.”
Olivine Corp. v. United Capitol Ins. Co., 92 P.3d 273 (Wash. Ct. App. 2004). “RCW 48.99.080(1) is Washington's severability provision, and Illinois has no similar provision.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 48.99.080(2) — 2 cases
Olivine Corp. v. United Capitol Ins., 92 P.3d 273 (Wash. Ct. App. 2004). “RCW 48.99.080(1) is Washington’s severability provision, and Illinois has no similar provision.”
Olivine Corp. v. United Capitol Ins. Co., 92 P.3d 273 (Wash. Ct. App. 2004). “RCW 48.99.080(1) is Washington's severability provision, and Illinois has no similar provision.”
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.