Wash. Rev. Code » Title 50 · Chapter 50.32
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 50.32.080 (2026)

Commissioner's review procedure

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
After having acquired jurisdiction for review, the commissioner shall review the proceedings in question. Prior to rendering his or her decision, the commissioner may order the taking of additional evidence by an appeal tribunal to be made a part of the record in the case. Upon the basis of evidence submitted to the appeal tribunal and such additional evidence as the commissioner may order to be taken, the commissioner shall render his or her decision in writing affirming, modifying, or setting aside the decision of the appeal tribunal. Alternatively, the commissioner may order further proceedings to be held before the appeal tribunal, upon completion of which the appeal tribunal shall issue a decision in writing affirming, modifying, or setting aside its previous decision. The new decision may be appealed under RCW 50.32.070. The commissioner shall mail his or her decision to the interested parties at their last known addresses.
[ 2010 c 8 s 13037; 1982 1st ex.s. c 18 s 8; 1945 c 35 s 124; Rem. Supp. 1945 s 9998-262.]

Notes:

Severability—Conflict with federal requirements—1982 1st ex.s. c 18: See notes following RCW 50.12.200.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 13 cases, 1984–2016 · leading case: State Ex Rel. Lige & Wm. B. Dickson Co. v. Cnty. of Pierce, 829 P.2d 217 (Wash. Ct. App. 1992).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State Ex Rel. Lige & Wm. B. Dickson Co. v. Cnty. of Pierce, 829 P.2d 217 (Wash. Ct. App. 1992). · cites it 2× “RCW 50.32.080, .097. [21] The examiner's finding 5 recited that the Planning Department determined that Lige & William B.”
Tapper v. Emp. Sec. Dep't, 858 P.2d 494 (Wash. 1993). “) Under RCW 50.32.080, the Commissioner has the power to review AU decisions and is the final authority for departmental determinations as regards unemployment compensation.”
Lenca v. Emp. SEC. Dept. of State, 200 P.3d 281 (Wash. Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 6× “Lenca's Appeals to Superior Court and to Court of Appeals ¶ 17 Lenca appealed to the Superior Court, which affirmed the Commissioner's Decision.”
Lenca v. Emp. Sec. Dep't, 148 Wash. App. 565 (Wash. Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 6× “Lenca’s Appeals to Superior Court and to Court of Appeals ¶17 Lenca appealed to the Superior Court, which affirmed the Commissioner’s decision.”
Delagrave v. Emp. Sec. Dep't, 111 P.3d 879 (Wash. Ct. App. 2005). “at 404 ; RCW 50.32.080. The commissioner is the final authority for the agency’s determinations on unemployment compensation.”
Darkenwald v. Emp. Sec. Dep't, 328 P.3d 977 (Wash. Ct. App. 2014). “RCW 50.32.080; Bauer v. Emp’t Sec. Dep’t, 126 Wn.”
Alexander v. Dep't of Emp. Sec., 688 P.2d 516 (Wash. Ct. App. 1984). · cites it 2× “*614 The Commissioner's authority to order additional evidence was explicitly recognized by superior court order, which claimants elected not to appeal, and by former RCW 50.32.080 3 which provided: Commissioner's review procedure.”
Washington Trucking Ass'n v. Emp. Sec. Dep't, 192 Wash. App. 621 (Wash. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 2× “RCW 50.32.080. Alternatively, the commissioner can order further proceedings before the ALJ.”
Delagrave v. Emp. Sec. Dept. of State, 111 P.3d 879 (Wash. Ct. App. 2005). “2d 494 ; RCW 50.32.080. The commissioner is the final authority for the agency's determinations on unemployment compensation.”
Bauer v. State Emp. Sec. Dept., 108 P.3d 1240 (Wash. Ct. App. 2005). “2d 494 ; RCW 50.32.080. The commissioner is the final authority for the agency's determinations on unemployment compensation.”
Bauer v. Emp. Sec. Dep't, 126 Wash. App. 468 (Wash. Ct. App. 2005). “at 404 ; RCW 50.32.080. The commissioner is the final authority for the agency’s determinations on unemployment compensation.”
Pacquing v. Dep't of Emp. Sec., 707 P.2d 150 (Wash. Ct. App. 1985). “See RCW 50.32.080; Alexander v. Department of Empl.”
Show all 13 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.