Wash. Rev. Code » Title 51 · Chapter 51.52
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 51.52.140 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
Except as otherwise provided in this chapter, the practice in civil cases shall apply to appeals prescribed in this chapter. Appeal shall lie from the judgment of the superior court as in other civil cases. The attorney general shall be the legal advisor of the department and the board.
[ 1961 c 23 s 51.52.140. Prior: 1957 c 70 s 64; 1951 c 225 s 19; prior: 1949 c 219 s 6, part; 1943 c 280 s 1, part; 1931 c 90 s 1, part; 1929 c 132 s 6, part; 1927 c 310 s 8, part; 1911 c 74 s 20, part; Rem. Supp. 1949 s 7697, part.]

Notes:

Rules of court: Method of appellate review superseded by RAP 2.1, 2.2.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 214 cases (38 in the last 5 years), 1954–2026 · leading case: Kaiser Aluminum & Chem. Corp. v. Dep't of Labor & Indus., 854 P.2d 611 (Wash. 1993).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Kaiser Aluminum & Chem. Corp. v. Dep't of Labor & Indus., 854 P.2d 611 (Wash. 1993). · cites it 6× “Appeal shall lie from the judgment of the superior court as in other ciyil cases. The attorney general shall be the legal advisor of the department and the board.”
Butson v. Dep't of Labor & Indus., 354 P.3d 924 (Wash. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 4× “RCW 51.52.140; Malang, 139 Wn. App. at 683 .”
Dep't of Labor & Indus. v. Rowley, 378 P.3d 139 (Wash. 2016). · cites it 2× “” RCW 51.52.140. And as the Department points out, the preponderance of the evidence standard generally applies in civil cases.”
City of Bellevue v. Raum, 286 P.3d 695 (Wash. Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 2× “f23 Our review is governed by RCW 51.52.140, which provides that an “[a]ppeal shall lie from the judgment of the superior court as in other civil cases.”
Shum v. Dep't of Labor & Indus., 819 P.2d 399 (Wash. Ct. App. 1991). · cites it 3× “Her contention rests on RCW 51.52.140, which provides: "Except as otherwise provided in this chapter, the practice in civil cases shall apply to appeals prescribed in this chapter.”
Weaver v. City of Everett, 450 P.3d 177 (Wash. 2019). “RCW 51.52.140; RCW 34.05.030(2)(a). We review summary judgment orders de novo, viewing all facts and reasonable inferences in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party.”
In Re Dependency of Grove, 897 P.2d 1252 (Wash. 1995). · cites it 2× “In the present case a right of appeal from the final superior court judgment is authorized by statute, RCW 51.52.140, but is not constitutionally mandated.”
Rogers v. Dep't of Labor & Indus., 151 Wash. App. 174 (Wash. Ct. App. 2009). “But Rogers incorrectly describes our inquiry.”
Rogers v. Dept. of Labor & Indus., 210 P.3d 355 (Wash. Ct. App. 2009). “¶ 19 All of this is significant because Rogers frames her appeal simply as a challenge to whether the Department's initial denial of authorization was factually justified. But Rogers incorrectly describes our inquiry.”
Holbrook v. Weyerhaeuser Co., 822 P.2d 271 (Wash. 2003). · cites it 2× “We reversed on different grounds. Lastly, even if RCW 51.”
Allan v. Dep't of Labor & Indus., 832 P.2d 489 (Wash. Ct. App. 1992). · cites it 2× “According to the Department, under RCW 51.52.140 the rules of civil practice apply to industrial insurance appeals and, under these rules and under RCW 4.”
Robinson v. Dep't of Labor & Indus., 326 P.3d 744 (Wash. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 2× “¶25 Our review of the superior court’s decision is governed by RCW 51.52.140. RCW 51.52.140 states that an “[ajppeal shall lie from the judgment of the superior court as in other civil cases.”
Show all 214 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.