Wash. Rev. Code » Title 51 · Chapter 51.32
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 51.32.210 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
*** CHANGE IN 2026 *** (SEE 6039-S.SL) ***
Claims of injured workers of employers who have secured the payment of compensation by insuring with the department shall be promptly acted upon by the department. Where temporary disability compensation is payable, the first payment thereof shall be mailed within fourteen days after receipt of the claim at the department's offices in Olympia and shall continue at regular semimonthly intervals. The payment of this or any other benefits under this title, prior to the entry of an order by the department in accordance with RCW 51.52.050 as now or hereafter amended, shall be not considered a binding determination of the obligations of the department under this title. The acceptance of compensation by the worker or his or her beneficiaries prior to such order shall likewise not be considered a binding determination of their rights under this title.
[ 1977 ex.s. c 350 s 55; 1972 ex.s. c 43 s 26.]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1985–2025 · leading case: Birrueta v. Dep't of Labor & Indus., 379 P.3d 120 (Wash. 2016).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Birrueta v. Dep't of Labor & Indus., 379 P.3d 120 (Wash. 2016). “RCW 51.32.210. Such a payment is made pursuant to a temporary order, which does not constitute a “binding determination” of the worker’s right to compensation at a particular rate.”
Rhodes v. Dep't of Labor & Indus., 700 P.2d 729 (Wash. 1985). “On May 23, 1977, the Department issued an interlocutory order under RCW 51.32.210 granting Rhodes' disability benefits.”
Ronald v. Ma'ae, V State Of Wa Dept Of Labor & Indus., 438 P.3d 148 (Wash. Ct. App. 2019). “If, within seven years from the date the first closing order became final, a formal application to reopen is filed which shows by "sufficient medical verification of such disability related to the accepted condition(s)" that benefits are payable, the department, or the…”
Clark Cnty., Res./cross-appellants v. Jennifer Maphet, App./cross (Wash. Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 2× “Therefore, based on the plain meaning of these rules, when the County authorized Maphet’s sixth, seventh, and eighth 3 The County also cites to RCW 51.32.210 and .240 to argue that the statutory scheme supports the County’s argument that “payment of benefits does not bind…”
Birrueta v. Dep't of Labor & Indus. (Wash. 2016). “RCW 51.32.210. Such a payment is made pursuant to a temporary order, which does not constitute a "binding determination" of the worker's right to compensation at a particular rate.”
Joshua Peterson v. Wa State Dept. Labor & Indus. (Wash. Ct. App. 2021). “190(3) or by [DLI] pursuant to RCW 51.32.210, the recipient thereof shall repay such benefits and recoupment may be made from any future payments due to the recipient on any claim with the state fund or self-insurer, as the case may be.”
Gary Yetter V. Dep't Of Labor & Indus. (Wash. Ct. App. 2025). “And he cites RCW 51.32.210, providing that claims of injured workers “shall be promptly acted upon.”
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.