Wash. Rev. Code » Title 64 · Chapter 64.38
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 64.38.050 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
Any violation of the provisions of this chapter entitles an aggrieved party to any remedy provided by law or in equity. The court, in an appropriate case, may award reasonable attorneys' fees to the prevailing party.
[ 1995 c 283 s 10.]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 27 cases (7 in the last 5 years), 2012–2025 · leading case: Roats v. Blakely Island Maint. Comm'n, Inc., 279 P.3d 943 (Wash. Ct. App. 2012).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Roats v. Blakely Island Maint. Comm'n, Inc., 279 P.3d 943 (Wash. Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 8× “The Roatses additionally sought an award of attorney fees pursuant to RCW 64.38.050 based upon that claim. In its motion, the Association sought dismissal of the Roatses’ open meetings violations claim and a ruling that no additional remedies were available to the Roatses based…”
Chad Stevens v. Bellevue Farm Owners, Ass'n, Respondent's, 198 Wash. App. 464 (Wash. Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 2× “7 See RCW 64.38.050 (court may award reasonable attorney fees to prevailing party for violation of chapter 64.”
Casey v. Sudden Valley Cmty. Ass'n, 329 P.3d 919 (Wash. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 3× “The [Association’s] Board’s practice of adopting “spending plans” without submitting such plans to a ratification vote of the membership violates RCW 64.”
Thaddeus C. Pritchett v. Picnic Point Homeowners Ass'n, 413 P.3d 604 (Wash. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 2× “IV Pritchett cross-appeals, contending that the trial court erred by denying him an award of attorney fees pursuant to RCW 64.38.050. That statute provides, in pertinent part,"Any violation of the provisions of[the statutes - 16- No.”
Saunders v. Meyers, 306 P.3d 978 (Wash. Ct. App. 2013). “020(4) and RCW 64.38.050 authorize a homeowners association to initiate litigation and collect attorney fees as the prevailing party.”
Spinnaker Ridge Cmty. Assoc. v. Christopher Guest (Wash. Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 9× “9, and RCW 64.38.050. Spinnaker Ridge requests attorney fees under RAP 18.”
Chad Stevens, Appellant/x-resp. v. Bellevue Farm Owners Ass'n, Respondents/x-apps. (Wash. Ct. App. 2020). · cites it 5× “BFOA then moved for an award of attorney fees under RCW 64.38.050. The trial court denied the request, concluding the case was not appropriate for such an award.”
Chad Stevens v. Bellevue Farm Owner's Ass'n (Wash. Ct. App. 2020). · cites it 5× “BFOA then moved for an award of attorney fees under RCW 64.38.050. The trial court denied the request, concluding the case was not appropriate for such an award.”
Bellevue Farms,et Al., Appellants/cross-respondents v. Chad Stevens, Respondent/cross-appellant (Wash. Ct. App. 2020). · cites it 5× “BFOA then moved for an award of attorney fees under RCW 64.38.050. The trial court denied the request, concluding the case was not appropriate for such an award.”
Darin & Lisa Chestnut, Respondent/cr-appellants V. Andrew Ko, Appellant/cr-respondent (Wash. Ct. App. 2025). · cites it 4× “630(1) (the trespass statute) and RCW 64.38.050 (the statute governing homeowners’ associations).”
Matt Surowiecki, Sr., App v. Hat Island Cmty. Assoc., Resps (Wash. Ct. App. 2020). · cites it 3× “And based on RCW 64.38.050, the trial court awarded $688,423.”
Gene & Maralee Bouma v. Silverado Cmty. Ass'n (Wash. Ct. App. 2020). · cites it 3× “The Association was awarded fees under RCW 64.38.050 and the 2015 CC&Rs. The Boumas argue this is not an enforcement case, and therefore relief 14 No.”
Show all 27 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.