Wash. Rev. Code » Title 6 · Chapter 6.32
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 6.32.030 (2026)

Third parties may be brought in for examination

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
Any person may be made a party to a supplemental proceeding by service of a like order in like manner as that required to be served upon the judgment debtor, and upon proof by affidavit or otherwise, to the satisfaction of the judge, that execution has been issued and return made thereon wholly or partially unsatisfied, and also that any person or corporation has personal property of the judgment debtor of the value of twenty-five dollars or over, or is indebted to him or her in said amount, or is holding the title to real estate for the judgment debtor, or has knowledge concerning the property interests of the judgment debtor, the judge may make an order requiring such person or corporation, or an officer thereof, to appear at a specified time and place before him or her, or a referee appointed by him or her, and answer concerning the same.
[ 2011 c 336 s 149; 1923 c 160 s 1; 1893 c 133 s 3; RRS s 615.]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1983–2022 · leading case: Seventh Elect Church in Israel v. Rogers, 660 P.2d 280 (Wash. Ct. App. 1983).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Seventh Elect Church in Israel v. Rogers, 660 P.2d 280 (Wash. Ct. App. 1983). · cites it 4× “Whether Gina Rogers was properly made a party to the supplemental proceedings pursuant to RCW 6.32.030. 2. Whether Gina Rogers established sufficient facts for her to claim the Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination.”
Seventh Elect Church v. Rogers, 688 P.2d 506 (Wash. 1984). “(Betts, Patterson) and William P. Fite (a member of Betts, Patterson), attorneys for Gerald Rogers, were requested to answer the following questions pertaining to the amount, source and manner of payment of legal fees paid to them by Rogers: 1.”
In the Matter of the Marriage of: Kimberly Anne Bartlett & Douglas Alan Bartlett (Wash. Ct. App. 2022). “Stenzel then moved for a supplemental order under RCW 6.32.030 to require the bank to turn over Mr.”
Dakshay Patel v. Jonathan I. Rabinowitz ex rel. Lakhani Assocs., LLC (Va. Ct. App. 2022). “69(b); Wash. Rev. Code § 6.32.030 . - 13 - Ashbacker Radio Corp.”
Dbm Consulting Engineers, Inc. v. Joseph D. Sanders (Wash. Ct. App. 2015). “010 and RCW 6.32.030. And, it awarded DBM attorney fees incurred pursuing SCV from March 4, 2011 through the entry of the supplemental judgment.”
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.