Wash. Rev. Code » Title 6 · Chapter 6.13

Wash. Rev. Code § 6.13.060

Conveyance or encumbrance by spouses or domestic partners

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
The homestead of a spouse or domestic partner cannot be conveyed or encumbered unless the instrument by which it is conveyed or encumbered is executed and acknowledged by both spouses or both domestic partners, except that either spouse or both or either domestic partner or both jointly may make and execute powers of attorney for the conveyance or encumbrance of the homestead. The conveyance or encumbrance of the homestead does not require that any dependent of the owner who is not a spouse or domestic partner execute and acknowledge the instrument by which it is conveyed or encumbered.
[ 2021 c 290 s 4; 2008 c 6 s 634; 1987 c 442 s 206; 1983 c 251 s 1; 1895 c 64 s 6; RRS s 534. Formerly RCW 6.12.110.]

Notes:

Findings—Effective date—2021 c 290: See notes following RCW 6.13.010.
Part headings not law—Severability—2008 c 6: See RCW 26.60.900 and 26.60.901.
Married persons and domestic partners, property: Chapter 26.16 RCW.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2004–2022 · leading case: Snohomish County v. Hawkins
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Snohomish County v. Hawkins (2004) washctapp “RCW 6.13.060. RCW 6.13.010(1), .020. 84 Wn.”
In re Disciplinary Proceedings Against Jensen (2018) wash “030 and RCW 6.13.060, courts lack the authority to give one spouse the right to unilaterally sell the community-owned family home.”
Snohomish County v. Hawkins (2004) washctapp “[11] RCW 6.13.060. [12] RCW 6.13.010(1), .020.”
Shu v. Ma (2022) wawd · cites it 4× “See Wash. Rev. Code § 6.13.060 (“The homestead of a spouse or domestic partner cannot be conveyed or 21 encumbered unless the instrument by which it is conveyed or encumbered is executed and acknowledged by both spouses or both domestic partners[.”
In Re The Estate Of Alan James v. Bank Of America (2015) washctapp · cites it 4× “030 and RCW 6.13.060. It argues that these provisions—by their plain language—render void as a matter of law any unilateral sale, conveyance, or encumbrance of community real property.”
Therese B. Jensen, Resp. v. Russell J. Jensen, Jr., App. (2015) washctapp · cites it 3× “030 and RCW 6.13.060 Jamie first argues that the trial court violated RCW 26.”
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.