Revised Code of Washington
Wash. Rev. Code § 50.32.070 (2026)
Petition for review by commissioner
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov
JustiaTitle on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Within thirty days from the date of notification or mailing, whichever is the earlier, of any decision of an appeal tribunal, the commissioner on his or her own order may, or upon petition of any interested party shall, take jurisdiction of the proceedings for the purpose of review thereof. Appeal from any decision of an appeal tribunal may be perfected so as to prevent finality of such decision if, within thirty days from the date of mailing the appeal tribunal decision, or notification thereof, whichever is the earlier, a petition in writing for review by the commissioner is received by the commissioner or by such representative of the commissioner as the commissioner by regulation shall prescribe. The commissioner may also prevent finality of any decision of an appeal tribunal and take jurisdiction of the proceedings for his or her review thereof by entering an order so providing on his or her own motion and mailing a copy thereof to the interested parties within the same period allowed herein for receipt of a petition for review. The time limit provided herein for the commissioner's assumption of jurisdiction on his or her own motion for review shall be deemed to be jurisdictional.
[ 1987 c 61 s 5; 1975 1st ex.s. c 228 s 5; 1947 c 215 s 31; 1945 c 35 s 123; Rem. Supp. 1947 s 9998-261.]
Notes:
Effective date—1975 1st ex.s. c 228: See note following RCW 50.04.355.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 17
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1961–2025 · leading case: Graves v. Emp. Sec. Dep't, 144 Wash. App. 302 (Wash. Ct. App. 2008).
Graves v. Emp. Sec. Dep't, 144 Wash. App. 302 (Wash. Ct. App. 2008). “RCW 50.32.070. ¶6 The commissioner affirmed the ALJ’s decision and found that Graves had not shown good cause for his failing to appear.”
Okamoto v. Emp. Sec. Dep't, 27 P.3d 1203 (Wash. Ct. App. 2001). “The commissioner dismissed the petition for review of the March decision as untimely filed without good cause, under RCW 50.32.070 and RCW 50.32.075. Regarding the petition for review of the December decision, the commissioner found that self-employment is not “employment” for…”
Allen v. Emp. Sec. Dep't, 516 P.2d 1032 (Wash. 1973). “As authorized in RCW 50.32.070, the appellant petitioned the Commissioner of Employment Security for a review of the determination of the appeal tribunal.”
Stewart v. Emp't Sec. Dep't, 419 P.3d 838 (Wash. 2018). “RCW 50.32.070 -.080. Only after the commissioner issues a decision may the parties seek judicial review.”
Okamoto v. Emp. Sec. Dept., 27 P.3d 1203 (Wash. Ct. App. 2001). “The commissioner dismissed the petition for review of the March decision as untimely filed without good cause, under RCW 50.32.070 and RCW 50.32.075. Regarding the petition for review of the December decision, the commissioner found that self-employment is not "employment" for…”
Graves v. Dep't of Emp. Sec., 182 P.3d 1004 (Wash. Ct. App. 2008). “RCW 50.32.070. ¶ 6 The commissioner affirmed the ALJ's decision and found that Graves had not shown good cause for his failing to appear.”
Washington Trucking Ass'n v. Emp. Sec. Dep't, 192 Wash. App. 621 (Wash. Ct. App. 2016). “RCW 50.32.070. After reviewing the proceedings that took place before the ALJ, the commissioner issues a decision in writing that affirms, modifies, or sets aside the ALJ’s decision.”
Lenca v. Emp. SEC. Dept. of State, 200 P.3d 281 (Wash. Ct. App. 2009). “The new decision may be appealed under RCW 50.32.070. The commissioner shall mail his decision to the interested parties at their last known addresses.”
Lenca v. Emp. Sec. Dep't, 148 Wash. App. 565 (Wash. Ct. App. 2009). “The new decision may be appealed under RCW 50.32.070. The commissioner shall mail his decision to the interested parties at their last known addresses.”
In Re Lamp, 358 P.2d 966 (Wash. 1961). “May 19th, the commissioner of the department caused notice to issue that the claim was being taken under advisement pursuant to RCW 50.32.070. May 26th, he filed a decision reversing the appeal tribunal, ruling that she was under the employment security act and directing that…”
State of Washington Emp. Sec. Dep't v. Ostrom Mushroom Co., 358 P.2d 966 (Wash. 1961). “May 19th, the commissioner of the department caused notice to issue that the claim was being taken under advisement pursuant to RCW 50.32.070. May 26th, he filed a decision reversing the appeal tribunal, ruling that she was under the employment security act and directing that…”
Hanratty v. Emp. Sec. Dep't, 933 P.2d 428 (Wash. Ct. App. 1997). “RCW 50.32.070, .075. Noel Foods filed this appeal nine months after the administrative law judge’s decision was entered.”
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.