Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 51.52.135 (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) When a worker or beneficiary prevails in an appeal by the employer to the board or in an appeal by the employer to the court from the decision and order of the board, the worker or beneficiary shall be entitled to interest at the rate of twelve percent per annum on the unpaid amount of the award after deducting the amount of attorney fees.

(2) When a worker or beneficiary prevails in an appeal by the worker or beneficiary to the board or the court regarding a claim for temporary total disability, the worker or beneficiary shall be entitled to interest at the rate of twelve percent per annum on the unpaid amount of the award after deducting the amount of attorney fees.

(3) The interest provided for in subsections (1) and (2) of this section shall accrue from the date of the department's order granting the award or denying payment of the award. The interest shall be paid by the party having the obligation to pay the award. The amount of interest to be paid shall be fixed by the board or court, as the case may be.

[ 1983 c 301 s 1.]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 9 cases, 1991–2020 · leading case: Shum v. Dep't of Labor & Indus., 819 P.2d 399 (Wash. Ct. App. 1991).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Shum v. Dep't of Labor & Indus., 819 P.2d 399 (Wash. Ct. App. 1991). · cites it 3× “*410 c Sovereign Immunity Shum next contends that prejudgment interest is impliedly authorized because the State waived its sovereign immunity and, hence, is liable for prejudgment interest because the amount of Shum's claim is a liquidated amount.”

Kaiser Aluminum & Chem. Corp. v. Dep't of Labor & Indus., 854 P.2d 611 (Wash. 1993). · cites it 2× “The basic administration of the Act is performed by the Department, whereas the function of the Board is to hear appeals, as an independent tribunal, from decisions made by the Department.”

Malang v. Dep't of L&i, 162 P.3d 450 (Wash. Ct. App. 2007). “We vacate the superior court's orders directing the BIIA to calculate Malang's wages from her gross commissions and to pay interest under RCW 51.52.135 [8] and WAC 263-12-160. [9] To correctly calculate her time-loss compensation award, L & I must apply the statutory provisions…”

Malang v. Dep't of Labor & Indus., 139 Wash. App. 677 (Wash. Ct. App. 2007). “We vacate the superior court’s orders directing the BIIA to calculate Malang’s wages from her gross commissions and to pay interest under RCW 51.52.135 8 and WAC 263-12-160. 9 To correctly calculate her time-loss compensation award, L&I must apply the statutory provisions to…”

Cena v. Dep't of Labor & Indus., 121 Wash. App. 915 (Wash. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 3× “25 Cena argues the Board and the superior court erred by failing to grant interest pursuant to RCW 51.52.135(2) and (3) 26 on the amounts encompassed in the two additional payments made after recalculation.”

Cena v. Dep't of Labor & Indus., 91 P.3d 903 (Wash. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 3× “[24] Cena argues the Board and the superior court erred by failing to grant interest pursuant to RCW 51.52.135(2) and (3) [25] on the amounts encompassed in the two additional payments made after recalculation.”

Zbigniew M. Laskowski v. State Of Washington Dept. Of Labor & Indus. (Wash. Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 4× “WAC 263-12-160(5) governs orders fixing interest: Upon receipt of all required information, interest will be calculated by the board at twelve percent per annum from the date of the department order granting the award in an appeal by the employer or the date of the department…”

Weyerhaeuser Co. v. Bd. of Indus. Ins. Appeals, 27 P.3d 1194 (Wash. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 4× “Citing RCW 51.52.135, it argued that the worker was not entitled to interest unless he prevailed on appeal; that to prevail on *508 appeal he had to recover as much or more than the Department’s order; and that he had not done that.”

Leonard G. Ellerbroek v. CHS Inc., 463 P.3d 750 (Wash. Ct. App. 2020). “Upon issuance of the order granting the appeal, the board will provide the worker with notice concerning the potential of an overpayment of benefits paid pending the outcome of the appeal and the requirements for interest on unpaid benefits pursuant to RCW 51.52.135. A worker…”

— Wash. Rev. Code § 51.52.135(1) — 1 case

Zbigniew M. Laskowski v. State Of Washington Dept. Of Labor & Indus. (Wash. Ct. App. 2019). “WAC 263-12-160(5) governs orders fixing interest: Upon receipt of all required information, interest will be calculated by the board at twelve percent per annum from the date of the department order granting the award in an appeal by the employer or the date of the department…”

— Wash. Rev. Code § 51.52.135(2) — 2 cases

Cena v. Dep't of Labor & Indus., 121 Wash. App. 915 (Wash. Ct. App. 2004). “25 Cena argues the Board and the superior court erred by failing to grant interest pursuant to RCW 51.52.135(2) and (3) 26 on the amounts encompassed in the two additional payments made after recalculation.”

Cena v. Dep't of Labor & Indus., 91 P.3d 903 (Wash. Ct. App. 2004). “[24] Cena argues the Board and the superior court erred by failing to grant interest pursuant to RCW 51.52.135(2) and (3) [25] on the amounts encompassed in the two additional payments made after recalculation.”

— Wash. Rev. Code § 51.52.135(3) — 3 cases

Kaiser Aluminum & Chem. Corp. v. Dep't of Labor & Indus., 854 P.2d 611 (Wash. 1993). “The basic administration of the Act is performed by the Department, whereas the function of the Board is to hear appeals, as an independent tribunal, from decisions made by the Department.”

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.