Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 64.08.010 (2026)

Who may take acknowledgments

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Acknowledgments of deeds, mortgages and other instruments in writing, required to be acknowledged may be taken in this state before a justice of the supreme court, or the clerk thereof, or the deputy of such clerk, before a judge of the court of appeals, or the clerk thereof, before a judge of the superior court, or qualified court commissioner thereof, or the clerk thereof, or the deputy of such clerk, or a county auditor, or the deputy of such auditor, or a qualified notary public, or a qualified United States commissioner appointed by any district court of the United States for this state, and all said instruments heretofore executed and acknowledged according to the provisions of this section are hereby declared legal and valid.

[ 1971 c 81 s 131; 1931 c 13 s 1; 1929 c 33 s 3; RRS s 10559. Prior: 1913 c 14 s 1; Code 1881 s 2315; 1879 p 110 s 1; 1877 p 317 s 5; 1875 p 107 s 1; 1873 p 466 s 5.]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 5 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1996–2023 · leading case: Stiley v. Block, 925 P.2d 194 (Wash. 1996).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Stiley v. Block, 925 P.2d 194 (Wash. 1996). “” RCW 64.08.010. RCW 64.08.050. Id. Meyers v.”

In re Betchan, 524 B.R. 830 (Bankr. E.D. Wash. 2015). · cites it 2× “, as Trustee for Soundview Home Loan Trust 2005-CTX1, Asset-Backed Certificates, Series 2005-CTX1.”

Stiley v. Block, 925 P.2d 194 (Wash. 1996). “" [88] RCW 64.08.010. [89] RCW 64.08.050. [90] Id.”

In re Petition for Vulnerable Adult Order of Prot. of: Helen Krinke (Wash. Ct. App. 2019). “RCW 64.08.010. However, an unacknowledged deed is “valid as between the parties, and valid as to all persons claiming under the grantor, except, perhaps, a purchaser of the property for a valuable consideration who took without actual notice of the outstanding deed.”

Jeffrey B. Weisert v. Patricia B. Weisert (Wash. Ct. App. 2023). “Assuming, without deciding, that CR 15(b) applies to summary judgment and that this is sufficient to constitute implied consent to review the issue, Jeffrey’s facial invalidity argument fails.”

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.