Wash. Rev. Code » Title 5 · Chapter 5.60
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 5.60.030 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026 Cite as: Wash. Rev. Code § 5.60.030 (2026)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
No person offered as a witness shall be excluded from giving evidence by reason of his or her interest in the event of the action, as a party thereto or otherwise, but such interest may be shown to affect his or her credibility: PROVIDED, HOWEVER, That in an action or proceeding where the adverse party sues or defends as executor, administrator or legal representative of any deceased person, or as deriving right or title by, through or from any deceased person, or as the guardian or limited guardian of the estate or person of any incompetent or disabled person, or of any minor under the age of fourteen years, then a party in interest or to the record, shall not be admitted to testify in his or her own behalf as to any transaction had by him or her with, or any statement made to him or her, or in his or her presence, by any such deceased, incompetent or disabled person, or by any such minor under the age of fourteen years: PROVIDED FURTHER, That this exclusion shall not apply to parties of record who sue or defend in a representative or fiduciary capacity, and have no other or further interest in the action.
[ 1977 ex.s. c 80 s 3; 1927 c 84 s 1; Code 1881 s 389; 1877 p 85 s 391; 1873 p 106 s 382; 1869 p 183 s 384; 1867 p 88 s 1; 1854 p 186 s 290; RRS s 1211.]

Notes:

Purpose—Intent—Severability—1977 ex.s. c 80: See notes following RCW 4.16.190.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 165 cases (16 in the last 5 years), 1952–2026 · leading case: Wildman v. Taylor
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Wildman v. Taylor (1987) washctapp · cites it 17× “The relevant facts depend on which documents and testimony by affidavit are admissible under the deadman's statute, RCW 5.60.030. The underlying facts, without exclusion under RCW 5.”
Erickson v. KERR, MDPS, INC. (1994) wash · cites it 7× “The Ericksons moved in limine, pursuant to the deadman's statutes, RCW 5.60.030, to exclude any testimony by Dr.”
Thor v. McDearmid (1991) washctapp · cites it 6× “*199 RCW 5.60.030 prohibits testimony from a party in interest as to (1) any transaction had by him or her with the deceased and (2) any statement made to him or her, or in his or her presence, by the deceased, when the testimony is adverse to the deceased and the opposing party…”
Estate of Lennon v. Lennon (2001) washctapp · cites it 4× “4 The deadman’s statute, RCW 5.60.030, bars testimony by a “party in interest” regarding “transactions” with the decedent or statements made to him by the decedent.”
Himes v. MacIntyre-Himes (1998) wash · cites it 8× “Admissibility of Evidence Under “Transaction With Deceased Person” Statute Under RCW 5.60.030, 52 the “transaction with deceased *727 person” statute, sometimes referred to as the “dead man’s statute,” 53 as a party in interest, 54 Petitioner Frances A.”
In Re Marriage of Himes (1998) wash · cites it 8× “ADMISSIBILITY OF EVIDENCE UNDER "TRANSACTION WITH DECEASED PERSON" STATUTETE Under RCW 5.60.030, [52] the "transaction with deceased person" statute, sometimes referred to as the "dead man's statute," [53] as a party in interest, [54] Petitioner Frances A.”
Johnson v. Nasi (1957) wash · cites it 6× “She was precluded by RCW 5.60.030 (transaction with person since deceased) from explaining the circumstances under which she obtained possession of the instruments.”
Bentzen v. Demmons (1993) washctapp · cites it 3× “2 The deadman's statute, RCW 5.60.030, provides in relevant part: No person offered as a witness shall be excluded from giving evidence by reason of his or her interest in the event of the action, as a party thereto or otherwise, but such interest may be shown to affect his or…”
Estate of Lennon v. Lennon (2001) washctapp · cites it 4× “[4] The deadman's statute, RCW 5.60.030, bars testimony by a "party in interest" regarding "transactions" with the decedent or statements made to him by the decedent.”
McGugart v. Brumback (1969) wash · cites it 6× “The primary issue raised on appeal is whether the submission of written interrogatories to plaintiff concerning his alleged transactions with the decedent was a waiver of defendant's right under RCW 5.60.030, the deadman's statute, to bar testimony by plaintiff at trial.”
King v. Clodfelter (1974) washctapp · cites it 5× “Throughout the presentation of the plaintiff’s case, the defendant resisted the introduction of evidence of a transaction with the decedent Julian Newbert on the ground that such would be contrary to RCW 5.60.030. The evidence was that the plaintiff prepared and submitted…”
Kellar v. Estate of Kellar (2012) washctapp · cites it 2× “The trial court properly struck portions of her declaration made in violation of the dead man’s statute, RCW 5.60.030, and properly concluded that the Estate had not waived the protections of the dead man’s statute.”
Show all 165 citing cases →
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.