Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 60.04.081 (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) Any owner of real property subject to a recorded claim of lien under this chapter, or contractor, subcontractor, lender, or lien claimant who believes the claim of lien to be frivolous and made without reasonable cause, or clearly excessive may apply by motion to the superior court for the county where the property, or some part thereof is located, for an order directing the lien claimant to appear before the court at a time no earlier than six nor later than fifteen days following the date of service of the application and order on the lien claimant, and show cause, if any he or she has, why the relief requested should not be granted. The motion shall state the grounds upon which relief is asked, and shall be supported by the affidavit of the applicant or his or her attorney setting forth a concise statement of the facts upon which the motion is based.

(2) The order shall clearly state that if the lien claimant fails to appear at the time and place noted the lien shall be released, with prejudice, and that the lien claimant shall be ordered to pay the costs requested by the applicant including reasonable attorneys' fees.

(3) If no action to foreclose the lien claim has been filed, the clerk of the court shall assign a cause number to the application and obtain from the applicant a filing fee pursuant to RCW 36.18.016. If an action has been filed to foreclose the lien claim, the application shall be made a part of that action.

(4) If, following a hearing on the matter, the court determines that the lien is frivolous and made without reasonable cause, or clearly excessive, the court shall issue an order releasing the lien if frivolous and made without reasonable cause, or reducing the lien if clearly excessive, and awarding costs and reasonable attorneys' fees to the applicant to be paid by the lien claimant. If the court determines that the lien is not frivolous and was made with reasonable cause, and is not clearly excessive, the court shall issue an order so stating and awarding costs and reasonable attorneys' fees to the lien claimant to be paid by the applicant.

(5) Proceedings under this section shall not affect other rights and remedies available to the parties under this chapter or otherwise.

[ 2006 c 192 s 3; 1992 c 126 s 6; 1991 c 281 s 8.]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 38 cases (8 in the last 5 years), 1997–2026 · leading case: W.R.P. Lake Union Ltd. P'ship v. Exterior Servs., Inc., 934 P.2d 722 (Wash. Ct. App. 1997).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

W.R.P. Lake Union Ltd. P'ship v. Exterior Servs., Inc., 934 P.2d 722 (Wash. Ct. App. 1997). · cites it 8× “(Exterior) asks us to determine whether a mechanics’ and materialmen’s lien should be released as frivolous and without reasonable cause in the summary proceeding created by RCW 60.04.081 1 based upon disputed assertions that Exterior *747 did not comply with two statutory…”

Intermountain Elec., Inc. v. G-A-T Bros. Constr., Inc., 115 Wash. App. 384 (Wash. Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 5× “RCW 60.04.081; W.R.P., 85 Wn. App. at 752 .”

Intermountain Elec., Inc. v. GAT BROS. CONST., INC., 62 P.3d 548 (Wash. Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 5× “RCW 60.04.081; W.R.P., 85 Wash.App. at 752 , 934 P.”

Blue Diamond Grp., Inc. v. KB Seattle 1, Inc., 266 P.3d 881 (Wash. Ct. App. 2011). · cites it 4× “181 because that provision is inconsistent with RCW 60.04.081 and that *459 statute should control on these facts.”

Andries v. Covey, 113 P.3d 483 (Wash. Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 8× “¶ 1 This appeal is from a superior court summary proceeding authorized by RCW 60.04.081, which allows an owner of real property to challenge a lien as frivolous or excessive.”

Andries v. Covey, 113 P.3d 483 (Wash. Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 7× “¶1 This appeal is from a superior court summary proceeding authorized by RCW 60.04.081, which allows an owner of real property to challenge a lien as frivolous or excessive.”

Pac. Indus., Inc. v. Singh, 86 P.3d 778 (Wash. Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 4× “On March 19, 2002, PI commenced an action under RCW 60.04.081, seeking a court order releasing Singh’s lien as frivolous and made without reasonable cause, or alternatively, a court order reducing what PI claimed was an excessive lien amount.”

Verbeek Props., LLC v. GreenCo Env't, Inc., 159 Wash. App. 82 (Wash. Ct. App. 2010). · cites it 3× “¶7 On March 13, Verbeek filed a motion to dismiss GreenCo’s lien as frivolous under RCW 60.04.081. ¶8 On April 6, while the motion to dismiss the lien was still pending, Verbeek filed a summons and complaint against GreenCo under a new cause number.”

SD Deacon Corp. v. Gaston, 206 P.3d 689 (Wash. Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 4× “The summary release of a lien under RCW 60.04.081 is not to occur unless the lien is so devoid of merit that the claim has no possibility of succeeding.”

S.D. Deacon Corp. v. Gaston Bros. Excavating, 150 Wash. App. 87 (Wash. Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 3× “The summary release of a lien under RCW 60.04.081 is not to occur unless the lien is so devoid of merit that the claim has no possibility of succeeding.”

Verbeek Props. v. Greenco Environ, 246 P.3d 205 (Wash. Ct. App. 2010). · cites it 3× “¶ 7 On March 13, Verbeek filed a motion to dismiss GreenCo's lien as frivolous under RCW 60.04.081. ¶ 8 On April 6, while the motion to dismiss the lien was still pending, Verbeek filed a summons and complaint against GreenCo under a new cause number.”

Williams v. Athletic Field, Inc., 261 P.3d 109 (Wash. 2011). · cites it 3× “¶5 The Williamses challenged the lien in Pierce County Superior Court under RCW 60.04.081, which establishes a special procedure for challenging frivolous mechanics’ liens.”

Show all 38 citing cases →

— Wash. Rev. Code § 60.04.081(1) — 10 cases

Verbeek Props., LLC v. GreenCo Env't, Inc., 159 Wash. App. 82 (Wash. Ct. App. 2010). “¶7 On March 13, Verbeek filed a motion to dismiss GreenCo’s lien as frivolous under RCW 60.04.081. ¶8 On April 6, while the motion to dismiss the lien was still pending, Verbeek filed a summons and complaint against GreenCo under a new cause number.”

Blue Diamond Grp., Inc. v. KB Seattle 1, Inc., 266 P.3d 881 (Wash. Ct. App. 2011). “181 because that provision is inconsistent with RCW 60.04.081 and that *459 statute should control on these facts.”

W.R.P. Lake Union Ltd. P'ship v. Exterior Servs., Inc., 934 P.2d 722 (Wash. Ct. App. 1997). “(Exterior) asks us to determine whether a mechanics’ and materialmen’s lien should be released as frivolous and without reasonable cause in the summary proceeding created by RCW 60.04.081 1 based upon disputed assertions that Exterior *747 did not comply with two statutory…”

SD Deacon Corp. v. Gaston, 206 P.3d 689 (Wash. Ct. App. 2009). “The summary release of a lien under RCW 60.04.081 is not to occur unless the lien is so devoid of merit that the claim has no possibility of succeeding.”

S.D. Deacon Corp. v. Gaston Bros. Excavating, 150 Wash. App. 87 (Wash. Ct. App. 2009). “The summary release of a lien under RCW 60.04.081 is not to occur unless the lien is so devoid of merit that the claim has no possibility of succeeding.”

— Wash. Rev. Code § 60.04.081(2) — 2 cases

Cosmopolitan Eng. Grp. v. Ondeo Degremont, Inc., 149 P.3d 666 (Wash. 2006).

Cosmopolitan Eng'g Grp., Inc. v. Ondeo Degremont, Inc., 159 Wash. 2d 292 (Wash. 2006).

— Wash. Rev. Code § 60.04.081(4) — 25 cases

Intermountain Elec., Inc. v. G-A-T Bros. Constr., Inc., 115 Wash. App. 384 (Wash. Ct. App. 2003). “RCW 60.04.081; W.R.P., 85 Wn. App. at 752 .”

Intermountain Elec., Inc. v. GAT BROS. CONST., INC., 62 P.3d 548 (Wash. Ct. App. 2003). “RCW 60.04.081; W.R.P., 85 Wash.App. at 752 , 934 P.”

Pac. Indus., Inc. v. Singh, 86 P.3d 778 (Wash. Ct. App. 2003). “On March 19, 2002, PI commenced an action under RCW 60.04.081, seeking a court order releasing Singh’s lien as frivolous and made without reasonable cause, or alternatively, a court order reducing what PI claimed was an excessive lien amount.”

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.