Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 51.24.030 (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) If a third person, not in a worker's same employ, is or may become liable to pay damages on account of a worker's injury for which benefits and compensation are provided under this title, the injured worker or beneficiary may elect to seek damages from the third person.

(2) In every action brought under this section, the plaintiff shall give notice to the department or self-insurer when the action is filed. The department or self-insurer may file a notice of statutory interest in recovery. When such notice has been filed by the department or self-insurer, the parties shall thereafter serve copies of all notices, motions, pleadings, and other process on the department or self-insurer. The department or self-insurer may then intervene as a party in the action to protect its statutory interest in recovery.

(3) For the purposes of this chapter, "injury" shall include any physical or mental condition, disease, ailment or loss, including death, for which compensation and benefits are paid or payable under this title.

(4) Damages recoverable by a worker or beneficiary pursuant to the underinsured motorist coverage of an insurance policy shall be subject to this chapter only if the owner of the policy is the employer of the injured worker.

(5) For the purposes of this chapter, "recovery" includes all damages except loss of consortium.

[ 1995 c 199 s 2; 1987 c 212 s 1701; 1986 c 58 s 1; 1984 c 218 s 3; 1977 ex.s. c 85 s 1.]

Notes:

Severability—1995 c 199: See note following RCW 51.12.120.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 107 cases (12 in the last 5 years), 1979–2026 · leading case: Tobin v. Dep't of Labor & Indus., 187 P.3d 780 (Wash. Ct. App. 2008).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Tobin v. Dep't of Labor & Indus., 187 P.3d 780 (Wash. Ct. App. 2008). · cites it 16× “The IIAJ reasoned that RCW 51.24.030 authorizes L & I to assert a right of recovery for third party awards for pain and suffering because RCW 51.”

Clark v. Pacificorp, 822 P.2d 162 (Wash. 1991). · cites it 13× “RCW 51.24.030. By electing to pursue the third party, the beneficiary 3 is not *175 precluded from receiving benefits.”

Flanigan v. Dep't of Labor & Indus., 869 P.2d 14 (Wash. 1994). · cites it 12× “060(1)(a)-(c), the recovery is divided and distributed in the following order: (1) attorney fees are paid; (2) 25 percent of the balance goes to the plaintiff employee or beneficiary; and (3) the Department "shall be paid the balance of the recovery made, but only to the extent…”

Tobin v. Dep't of Labor & Indus., 239 P.3d 544 (Wash. 2010). · cites it 14× “Left with the plain language of the amendment, the court has an "either or" choice.”

Tallerday v. Delong, 842 P.2d 1023 (Wash. Ct. App. 1993). · cites it 20× “The issue in this case is whether an injured worker's malpractice recovery against an attorney for negligence in pursuing a third party claim under RCW 51.24.030 is subject to the Department's reimbursement hen.”

Tobin v. Dep't of Labor & Indus., 169 Wash. 2d 396 (Wash. 2010). · cites it 12× “” ¶18 Tobin counters that RCW 51.24.030, including the amendment, should not be read in isolation, but in context with RCW 51.”

Entila v. Cook, 386 P.3d 1099 (Wash. 2017). · cites it 13× “Instead, third party immunity is guided by a different statutory provision—RCW 51.24.030. When an injured person brings a personal injury action, the third party tortfeasor is not eligible for statutory immunity unless they are in the “same employ” as their coworker.”

Hi-Way Fuel Co. v. Est. of Allyn, 115 P.3d 1031 (Wash. Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 11× “Specifically, it argues that deducting loss of consortium damages "off the top" of a partial recovery, rather than proportionate to the jury's award, is contrary to *1035 RCW 51.24.030 and .060 and that, under Mills v.”

Hi-Way Fuel Co. v. Est. of Allyn, 128 Wash. App. 351 (Wash. Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 11× “Specifically, it argues that deducting loss of consortium damages “off the top” of a partial recovery, rather than proportionate to the jury’s award, is contrary to RCW 51.24.030 and .060 and that, under Mills v.”

Michaels v. CH2M Hill, Inc., 171 Wash. 2d 587 (Wash. 2011). · cites it 4× “RCW 51.24.030; Flanigan v. Dep’t of Labor & Indus.”

Michaels v. CH2M Hill, Inc., 257 P.3d 532 (Wash. 2011). · cites it 4× “RCW 51.24.030; Flanigan v. Dep't of Labor & Indus.”

Nielson v. Wolfkill Corp., 734 P.2d 961 (Wash. Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 9× “With two exceptions, the act abolishes the jurisdiction of the courts over causes of action arising out of such injuries.”

Show all 107 citing cases →

— Wash. Rev. Code § 51.24.030(1) — 58 cases

Tallerday v. Delong, 842 P.2d 1023 (Wash. Ct. App. 1993). “The issue in this case is whether an injured worker's malpractice recovery against an attorney for negligence in pursuing a third party claim under RCW 51.24.030 is subject to the Department's reimbursement hen.”

Evans v. Thompson, 879 P.2d 938 (Wash. 1994).

DuVon v. Rockwell Int'l, 807 P.2d 876 (Wash. 1991).

Williams v. Leone & Keeble, Inc., 171 Wash. 2d 726 (Wash. 2011).

Minton v. Ralston Purina Co., 47 P.3d 556 (Wash. 2002).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 51.24.030(2) — 21 cases

Clark v. Pacificorp, 822 P.2d 162 (Wash. 1991). “RCW 51.24.030. By electing to pursue the third party, the beneficiary 3 is not *175 precluded from receiving benefits.”

Burnett v. Dep't of Corr., 349 P.3d 42 (Wash. Ct. App. 2015).

Tobin v. Dep't of Labor & Indus., 239 P.3d 544 (Wash. 2010). “Left with the plain language of the amendment, the court has an "either or" choice.”

Tobin v. Dep't of Labor & Indus., 169 Wash. 2d 396 (Wash. 2010). “” ¶18 Tobin counters that RCW 51.24.030, including the amendment, should not be read in isolation, but in context with RCW 51.”

Maxey v. Dep't of Labor & Indus., 789 P.2d 75 (Wash. 1990).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 51.24.030(3) — 8 cases

Walston v. Boeing Co., 334 P.3d 519 (Wash. 2014).

Gersema v. Allstate Ins. Co., 112 P.3d 552 (Wash. Ct. App. 2005).

Gersema v. Allstate Ins., 127 Wash. App. 687 (Wash. Ct. App. 2005).

Cockrum v. C.H. Murphy/Clark-Ullman, Inc. (Wash. 2025).

Walston v. Boeing Co. (Wash. 2014).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 51.24.030(4) — 2 cases

Frost v. Dep't of Labor & Indus., 954 P.2d 1340 (Wash. Ct. App. 1998).

O'Rourke v. Dep't of Labor & Indus., 788 P.2d 17 (Wash. Ct. App. 1990).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 51.24.030(5) — 17 cases

Tobin v. Dep't of Labor & Indus., 187 P.3d 780 (Wash. Ct. App. 2008). “The IIAJ reasoned that RCW 51.24.030 authorizes L & I to assert a right of recovery for third party awards for pain and suffering because RCW 51.”

Tobin v. Dep't of Labor & Indus., 239 P.3d 544 (Wash. 2010). “Left with the plain language of the amendment, the court has an "either or" choice.”

Hi-Way Fuel Co. v. Est. of Allyn, 115 P.3d 1031 (Wash. Ct. App. 2005). “Specifically, it argues that deducting loss of consortium damages "off the top" of a partial recovery, rather than proportionate to the jury's award, is contrary to *1035 RCW 51.24.030 and .060 and that, under Mills v.”

Hi-Way Fuel Co. v. Est. of Allyn, 128 Wash. App. 351 (Wash. Ct. App. 2005). “Specifically, it argues that deducting loss of consortium damages “off the top” of a partial recovery, rather than proportionate to the jury’s award, is contrary to RCW 51.24.030 and .060 and that, under Mills v.”

— Wash. Rev. Code § 51.24.030(l) — 2 cases

Entila v. Cook, 386 P.3d 1099 (Wash. 2017). “Instead, third party immunity is guided by a different statutory provision—RCW 51.24.030. When an injured person brings a personal injury action, the third party tortfeasor is not eligible for statutory immunity unless they are in the “same employ” as their coworker.”

Entila v. Cook (Wash. 2017).

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.