Wash. Rev. Code » Title 64 · Chapter 64.04
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 64.04.050 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
Quitclaim deeds may be in substance in the following form:
The grantor (here insert the name or names and place of residence), for and in consideration of (here insert consideration) conveys and quitclaims to (here insert grantee's name or names) all interest in the following described real estate (here insert description), situated in the county of . . . . . ., state of Washington. Dated this . . . . day of . . . . . ., (year) . . . .
Every deed in substance in the above form, when otherwise duly executed, shall be deemed and held a good and sufficient conveyance, release and quitclaim to the grantee, his or her heirs and assigns in fee of all the then existing legal and equitable rights of the grantor in the premises therein described, but shall not extend to the after acquired title unless words are added expressing such intention.
[ 2016 c 202 s 39; 2012 c 117 s 188; 1929 c 33 s 11; RRS s 10554. Prior: 1886 p 178 s 5.]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 29 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1954–2024 · leading case: Bale v. Allison, 294 P.3d 789 (Wash. Ct. App. 2013).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Bale v. Allison, 294 P.3d 789 (Wash. Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 5× “The quit claim deed executed by [Bob] in December 2008 does not meet the fundamental statutory requirements for a “good and sufficient conveyance, release and quitclaim to the grantee[s]” pursuant to RCW 64.04.050, and therefore, is ineffective to transfer the Winthrop property…”
Newport Yacht Basin v. Supreme Nw., 277 P.3d 18 (Wash. Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 4× “RCW 64.04.050. ¶ 15 Here, the 1981 quitclaim deed states that "[t]he Grantors .”
Newport Yacht Basin Ass'n of Condo. Owners v. Supreme Nw., Inc., 168 Wash. App. 56 (Wash. Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 4× “RCW 64.04.050. ¶15 Here, the 1981 quitclaim deed states that “ [t]he Grantors .”
Washington State Bar Ass'n v. Great W. Union Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n, 586 P.2d 870 (Wash. 1978). · cites it 2× “040, and RCW 64.04.050, to which the Defendant is not a party and whether or not a fee is charged of the parties thereto, and mortgages, deeds of trust, promissory notes or agreements modifying such documents to which the Defendant Great Western is a party and charges a fee of…”
Crafts v. Pitts, 162 P.3d 382 (Wash. 2007). “Scramlin v. Warner, 69 Wash.2d 6 , 416 P.”
Crafts v. Pitts, 161 Wash. 2d 16 (Wash. 2007). “Scramlin v. Warner, 69 Wn.2d 6 , 416 P.2d 699 (1966).”
Kershaw Sunnyside Ranches, Inc. v. Yakima Interurban Lines Ass'n, 126 P.3d 16 (Wash. 2006). “at 728 -29 (quoting RCW 64.04.050) (ostensibly distinguishing Harris on the basis that it involved a statutory warranty deed).”
Hackler v. Hackler, 683 P.2d 241 (Wash. Ct. App. 1984). “2d 1188 (1974); RCW 64.04.050. Ron and Gwynne conveyed their interest in the house to the Hacklers when they delivered the quitclaim deed in September 1977.”
Snohomish Cnty. v. Hawkins, 89 P.3d 713 (Wash. Ct. App. 2004). “at 55-56 (citing RCW 64.04.050 (1973); McCoy v. Lowrie, 44 Wn.”
Roeder Co. v. K & E Moving & Storage Co., 4 P.3d 839 (Wash. Ct. App. 2000). “2d 526 [19] See RCW 64.04.050. [20] 37 Wash.2d 533 , 225 P.”
Roeder Co. v. K&E Moving & Storage Co., 102 Wash. App. 49 (Wash. Ct. App. 2000). “See RCW 64.04.050. 37 Wn.2d 533 , 225 P.2d 199 (1950).”
Snohomish Cnty. v. Hawkins, 89 P.3d 713 (Wash. Ct. App. 2004). “2d 1188 (citing RCW 64.04.050 (1973); McCoy v. Lowrie, 44 Wash.”
Show all 29 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.