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

Wash. Rev. Code § 6.32.130 (2026)

Service of orders

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
An injunction order or an order requiring a person to attend and be examined made as prescribed in this chapter must be served by delivering to the person to be served a certified copy of the original order and a copy of the affidavit on which it was made. In the case of an order requiring a person to attend and be examined and not imposing injunctive restraints, a noncertified copy may be served if the noncertified copy bears a stamp or notation indicating the name of the judge or commissioner who signed the original order, and a stamp or notation indicating the original order has been filed with the court.
Service upon a corporation is sufficient if made upon an officer, to whom a copy of a summons must be delivered. Where an order is personally served upon a corporation, unless the officer to be served is specially designated in the order, the order may be served upon any person upon whom a summons can be served.
[ 1995 c 73 s 1; 1925 ex.s. c 38 s 1; 1893 c 133 s 13; RRS s 625.]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1953–2025 · leading case: State v. Ralph Williams' North West Chrysler Plymouth, Inc., 553 P.2d 442 (Wash. 1976).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Ralph Williams' North West Chrysler Plymouth, Inc., 553 P.2d 442 (Wash. 1976). · cites it 2× “Appellants, however, point to RCW 6.32.130 1 (proceedings supplemental to execution) and contend that in the context of this case, that statute requires personal service in the instant ancillary proceedings.”
Allen v. Am. Land Rsch., 611 P.2d 420 (Wash. Ct. App. 1980). · cites it 2× “We hold that this second contempt order must be reversed for three separate reasons. The first of these is that the contempt order was entered to enforce collection of the judgment and must fall with it.”
Est. of Bremer v. Walker, 348 P.3d 1245 (Wash. Ct. App. 2015). “Further, RCW 6.32.130 provides that copies of such an order and the affidavit on which the order was made must be served on the judgment debtor.”
Arnold v. Nat'l Union of Marine Cooks & Stewards Ass'n, 257 P.2d 629 (Wash. 1953). “Appellant points out that RCW 6.32.130 provides how orders in supplemental proceedings will be served on “persons” and “corporations.”
Betz Cellars, Llc V. Red Scare Media, Llc D/b/a Varial Agency (Wash. Ct. App. 2025). · cites it 5× “Beck through the supplemental proceedings has disputed his role in Varial; however, the proper means to address this was to be examined rather than attempt to obfuscate his role through pleadings after issuance of the order to appear and be examined already issued.”
Arnold v. Nat. Union of Marine Cooks Etc., 257 P.2d 629 (Wash. 1953). “[3] Appellant points out that RCW 6.32.130 provides how orders in supplemental proceedings will be served on "persons" and "corporations.”
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.