Wash. Rev. Code » Title 49 · Chapter 49.46
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 49.46.090 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(1) Any employer who pays any employee less than the amounts to which such employee is entitled under or by virtue of this chapter, shall be liable to such employee affected for the full amount due to such employee under this chapter, less any amount actually paid to such employee by the employer, and for costs and such reasonable attorney's fees as may be allowed by the court. Any agreement between such employee and the employer allowing the employee to receive less than what is due under this chapter shall be no defense to such action.
(2) At the written request of any employee paid less than the amounts to which he or she is entitled under or by virtue of this chapter, the director may take an assignment under this chapter or as provided in RCW 49.48.040 of such claim in trust for the assigning employee and may bring any legal action necessary to collect such claim, and the employer shall be required to pay the costs and such reasonable attorney's fees as may be allowed by the court.
[ 2017 c 2 s 7 (Initiative Measure No. 1433, approved November 8, 2016); 2010 c 8 s 12043; 1959 c 294 s 9.]

Notes:

Intent—Effective date—2017 c 2 (Initiative Measure No. 1433): See notes following RCW 49.46.005.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 72 cases (22 in the last 5 years), 1982–2026 · leading case: Bostain v. Food Exp., Inc., 153 P.3d 846 (Wash. 2007).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Bostain v. Food Exp., Inc., 153 P.3d 846 (Wash. 2007). · cites it 4× “They also sought attorney fees pursuant to RCW 49.46.090(1), RCW 49.48.030, and RCW 49.”
Bostain v. Food Express, Inc., 159 Wash. 2d 700 (Wash. 2007). · cites it 4× “They also sought attorney fees pursuant to RCW 49.46.090(1), RCW 49.48.030, and RCW 49.”
McConnell v. Mothers Work, Inc., 128 P.3d 128 (Wash. Ct. App. 2006). · cites it 8× “" RCW 49.46.090. Finally, Mothers Work contends that the court did not make a sufficient record to support its findings or explain its discretionary decision on the amount of fees.”
Champagne v. Thurston Cnty., 163 Wash. 2d 69 (Wash. 2008). · cites it 5× “RCW 49.46.090. ¶32 Champagne encourages the court to consider by analogy federal interpretations of section 207 of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (FLSA), 29 U.”
Champagne v. Thurston Cnty., 178 P.3d 936 (Wash. 2008). · cites it 5× “RCW 49.46.090. ¶ 32 Champagne encourages the court to consider by analogy federal interpretations of section 207 of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, 29 U.”
McConnell v. Mothers Work, Inc., 131 Wash. App. 525 (Wash. Ct. App. 2006). · cites it 7× “” RCW 49.46.090 (emphasis added). And, McConnell argues, the minimum wage act is a remedial statute that must be liberally construed.”
Hisle v. Todd Pac. Shipyards Corp., 151 Wash. 2d 853 (Wash. 2004). · cites it 2× “RCW 49.46.090(1) (emphasis added). RAP 18.”
Hisle v. Todd Pac. Shipyards Corp., 93 P.3d 108 (Wash. 2004). · cites it 2× “RCW 49.46.090(1) (emphasis added). RAP 18.”
Charles Peiffer v. Pro-Cut Concrete Cutting & Breaking, Inc., 431 P.3d 1018 (Wash. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 3× “3d 128 (2006) (RCW 49.46.090 authorizes expanded costs “as may be allowed by the court.”
Seattle Prof'l Eng'g Employees Ass'n v. Boeing Co., 991 P.2d 1126 (Wash. 2000). · cites it 2× “46 RCW, were entitled to recover damages as specified in RCW 49.46.090. We further hold the applicable limitation period for the employees’ claims is three years.”
Anfinson v. FedEx Ground Package Sys., Inc., 159 Wash. App. 35 (Wash. Ct. App. 2010). · cites it 2× “ATTORNEY FEES ¶101 Anfinson seeks fees on appeal based on RCW 49.46.090 and RCW 49.48.030. Because it is premature to determine whether such an award is proper at this stage of this case, we deny the request without prejudice to a future application for such fees.”
Anfinson v. FedEx Ground Package Sys., Inc., 281 P.3d 289 (Wash. 2012). “As did the Court of Appeals, we also decline to award attorney fees to Anfinson under RCW 49.46.090(1) or ROW 49.48.030 as such an award would be premature.”
Show all 72 citing cases →
— Wash. Rev. Code § 49.46.090(1) — 40 cases
Bostain v. Food Exp., Inc., 153 P.3d 846 (Wash. 2007). “They also sought attorney fees pursuant to RCW 49.46.090(1), RCW 49.48.030, and RCW 49.”
Bostain v. Food Express, Inc., 159 Wash. 2d 700 (Wash. 2007). “They also sought attorney fees pursuant to RCW 49.46.090(1), RCW 49.48.030, and RCW 49.”
Hisle v. Todd Pac. Shipyards Corp., 151 Wash. 2d 853 (Wash. 2004). “RCW 49.46.090(1) (emphasis added). RAP 18.”
Hisle v. Todd Pac. Shipyards Corp., 93 P.3d 108 (Wash. 2004). “RCW 49.46.090(1) (emphasis added). RAP 18.”
McConnell v. Mothers Work, Inc., 128 P.3d 128 (Wash. Ct. App. 2006). “" RCW 49.46.090. Finally, Mothers Work contends that the court did not make a sufficient record to support its findings or explain its discretionary decision on the amount of fees.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 49.46.090(2) — 1 case
Skau v. JBS Carriers, Inc (W.D. Wash. 2021).
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.