Wash. Rev. Code » Title 68 · Chapter 68.50
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 68.50.160 (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) A person has the right to control the disposition of his or her own remains without the predeath or postdeath consent of another person. A valid written document expressing the decedent's wishes regarding the place or method of disposition of his or her remains, signed by the decedent in the presence of a witness, is sufficient legal authorization for the procedures to be accomplished.
(2) Prearrangements that are prepaid, or filed with a licensed funeral establishment or cemetery authority, under RCW 18.39.280 through 18.39.345 and chapter 68.46 RCW are not subject to cancellation or substantial revision by survivors. Absent actual knowledge of contrary legal authorization under this section, a licensed funeral establishment or cemetery authority may not be held criminally nor civilly liable for acting upon such prearrangements.
(3) If the decedent has not made a prearrangement as set forth in subsection (2) of this section or the costs of executing the decedent's wishes regarding the disposition of the decedent's remains exceeds a reasonable amount or directions have not been given by the decedent, the right to control the disposition of the remains of a deceased person vests in, and the duty of disposition and the liability for the reasonable cost of preparation, care, and disposition of such remains devolves upon the following in the order named:
(a) The person designated by the decedent as authorized to direct disposition as listed on the decedent's United States department of defense record of emergency data, DD form 93, or its successor form, if the decedent died while serving in military service as described in 10 U.S.C. Sec. 1481(a) (1)-(8) in any branch of the United States armed forces, United States reserve forces, or national guard;
(b) The designated agent of the decedent as directed through a written document signed and dated by the decedent in the presence of a witness. The direction of the designated agent is sufficient to direct the type, place, and method of disposition;
(c) The surviving spouse or state registered domestic partner;
(d) The majority of the surviving adult children of the decedent;
(e) The surviving parents of the decedent;
(f) The majority of the surviving siblings of the decedent;
(g) A court-appointed guardian for the person at the time of the person's death.
(4) If any person to whom the right of control has vested pursuant to subsection (3) of this section has been arrested or charged with first or second degree murder or first degree manslaughter in connection with the decedent's death, the right of control is relinquished and passed on in accordance with subsection (3) of this section.
(5) If a cemetery authority as defined in RCW 68.04.190 or a funeral establishment licensed under chapter 18.39 RCW has made a good faith effort to locate the person cited in subsection (3)(a) through (g) of this section or the legal representative of the decedent's estate, the cemetery authority or funeral establishment has the right to rely on an authority to bury or make final disposition of the human remains, executed by the most responsible party available, and the cemetery authority or funeral establishment may not be held criminally or civilly liable for burying or performing final disposition of the human remains. In the event any government agency or charitable organization provides the funds for the disposition of any human remains, the cemetery authority, alkaline hydrolysis, natural organic reduction facility, or funeral establishment may not be held criminally or civilly liable for making final disposition of the human remains.
(6) The liability for the reasonable cost of preparation, care, and disposition devolves jointly and severally upon all kin of the decedent in the same degree of kindred, in the order listed in subsection (3) of this section, and upon the estate of the decedent.
[ 2019 c 432 s 23; 2012 c 5 s 1; 2011 c 265 s 2; 2010 c 274 s 602; 2007 c 156 s 24; 2005 c 365 s 141; 1993 c 297 s 1; 1992 c 108 s 1; 1943 c 247 s 29; Rem. Supp. 1943 s 3778-29. Formerly RCW 68.08.160.]

Notes:

Effective date—2019 c 432: See note following RCW 68.05.175.
Intent—2010 c 274: See note following RCW 10.31.100.
Disposal of remains of indigent persons: RCW 36.39.030.
Order of payment of debts of estate: RCW 11.76.110.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 19 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 2007–2025 · leading case: Adams v. King Cnty., 192 P.3d 891 (Wash. 2008).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Adams v. King Cnty., 192 P.3d 891 (Wash. 2008). · cites it 2× “RCW 68.50.160(3). Furthermore, family members derive an interest in the proper treatment of the body of a deceased relative under the common law, which as discussed below provides its own remedies to protect such a recognized interest.”
Adams v. King Cnty., 164 Wash. 2d 640 (Wash. 2008). · cites it 2× “RCW 68.50.160(3). Furthermore, family members derive an interest in the proper treatment of the body of a deceased relative under the common law, which as discussed below provides its own remedies to protect such a recognized interest.”
Whitney v. Cervantes, 328 P.3d 957 (Wash. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 9× “To *71 execute this right, “[a] valid written document expressing the decedent’s wishes regarding the place or method of disposition of his or her remains, signed by the decedent in the presence of a witness, is sufficient legal authorization for the procedures to be…”
Lee v. Jasman, 332 P.3d 1106 (Wash. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 3× “The statute reads: The funeral director or person having the right to control the disposition of the human remains under RCW 68.50.160 [(coroner)] shall file the certificate of death .”
Braun v. Selig, 376 P.3d 447 (Wash. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 6× “110’s dictate to bury or cremate human remains “within a reasonable time after death,” the right to control the disposition of human remains, the liability of a funeral establishment or cemetery authority when effectuating the disposition, and the liability for the cost of…”
Amaker v. King Cnty., 479 F. Supp. 2d 1159 (W.D. Wash. 2007). · cites it 4× “Defendants pointed specifically to RCW 68.50.160, which governs the right to control the disposition of the remains of a deceased person.”
Newlon v. Alexander, 272 P.3d 903 (Wash. Ct. App. 2012). “" RCW 68.50.160(3)(d), A coroner may "hold an inquest upon a body" and may authorize dissection in those cases.”
Fox v. City of Bellingham, 482 P.3d 897 (Wash. 2021). · cites it 22× “Fox, as the brother of the deceased, who is not the custodian of his brother’s remains under RCW 68.50.160, is an improper party to bring this suit.”
State Of Washington, V Michael C. Boisselle, Jr., 415 P.3d 621 (Wash. Ct. App. 2018). “The legislature was concerned "that certain practices in storing human remains and in performing cremations violate common notions of decency and generally held expectations," and sought to reaffirm "that certain practices, which have never been acceptable, violate principles of…”
In re the Marriage of Newlon, 167 Wash. App. 195 (Wash. Ct. App. 2012). “” RCW 68.50.160(3)(d). A coroner may “hold an inquest upon [a] body” and may authorize dissection in those cases.”
Theresa Whitney v. Cecilia Cervantes (Wash. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 9× “While the right to control disposition of a body arose out of common law, it is no,",:, codified by statute in RCW 68.50.160. 3 A person has the right to control the disposition The Washington Supreme Court in Herz! noted that the right of custody over a 3 dead body and disposal…”
Keith Dahl v. Gina Fino & Pac. Nw Forensic Pathologists (Wash. Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 5× “105 nor RCW 68.50.160 contemplate a specific duty regarding the performance of an autopsy to a particular and circumscribed class of persons, the legislative intent exception does not apply here.”
Show all 19 citing cases →
— Wash. Rev. Code § 68.50.160(1) — 5 cases
Braun v. Selig, 376 P.3d 447 (Wash. Ct. App. 2016). “110’s dictate to bury or cremate human remains “within a reasonable time after death,” the right to control the disposition of human remains, the liability of a funeral establishment or cemetery authority when effectuating the disposition, and the liability for the cost of…”
Whitney v. Cervantes, 328 P.3d 957 (Wash. Ct. App. 2014). “To *71 execute this right, “[a] valid written document expressing the decedent’s wishes regarding the place or method of disposition of his or her remains, signed by the decedent in the presence of a witness, is sufficient legal authorization for the procedures to be…”
Theresa Whitney v. Cecilia Cervantes (Wash. Ct. App. 2014). “While the right to control disposition of a body arose out of common law, it is no,",:, codified by statute in RCW 68.50.160. 3 A person has the right to control the disposition The Washington Supreme Court in Herz! noted that the right of custody over a 3 dead body and disposal…”
In The Matter Of The Reinterment Of The Remains Of Kyril Faenov (Wash. Ct. App. 2016).
Fox v. City of Bellingham, 482 P.3d 897 (Wash. 2021). “Fox, as the brother of the deceased, who is not the custodian of his brother’s remains under RCW 68.50.160, is an improper party to bring this suit.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 68.50.160(2) — 1 case
Fox v. City of Bellingham, 482 P.3d 897 (Wash. 2021). “Fox, as the brother of the deceased, who is not the custodian of his brother’s remains under RCW 68.50.160, is an improper party to bring this suit.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 68.50.160(3) — 10 cases
Adams v. King Cnty., 192 P.3d 891 (Wash. 2008). “RCW 68.50.160(3). Furthermore, family members derive an interest in the proper treatment of the body of a deceased relative under the common law, which as discussed below provides its own remedies to protect such a recognized interest.”
Adams v. King Cnty., 164 Wash. 2d 640 (Wash. 2008). “RCW 68.50.160(3). Furthermore, family members derive an interest in the proper treatment of the body of a deceased relative under the common law, which as discussed below provides its own remedies to protect such a recognized interest.”
Amaker v. King Cnty., 479 F. Supp. 2d 1159 (W.D. Wash. 2007). “Defendants pointed specifically to RCW 68.50.160, which governs the right to control the disposition of the remains of a deceased person.”
Braun v. Selig, 376 P.3d 447 (Wash. Ct. App. 2016). “110’s dictate to bury or cremate human remains “within a reasonable time after death,” the right to control the disposition of human remains, the liability of a funeral establishment or cemetery authority when effectuating the disposition, and the liability for the cost of…”
Whitney v. Cervantes, 328 P.3d 957 (Wash. Ct. App. 2014). “To *71 execute this right, “[a] valid written document expressing the decedent’s wishes regarding the place or method of disposition of his or her remains, signed by the decedent in the presence of a witness, is sufficient legal authorization for the procedures to be…”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 68.50.160(3)(a) — 2 cases
Whitney v. Cervantes, 328 P.3d 957 (Wash. Ct. App. 2014). “To *71 execute this right, “[a] valid written document expressing the decedent’s wishes regarding the place or method of disposition of his or her remains, signed by the decedent in the presence of a witness, is sufficient legal authorization for the procedures to be…”
Theresa Whitney v. Cecilia Cervantes (Wash. Ct. App. 2014). “While the right to control disposition of a body arose out of common law, it is no,",:, codified by statute in RCW 68.50.160. 3 A person has the right to control the disposition The Washington Supreme Court in Herz! noted that the right of custody over a 3 dead body and disposal…”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 68.50.160(3)(c) — 2 cases
Amaker v. King Cnty., 479 F. Supp. 2d 1159 (W.D. Wash. 2007). “Defendants pointed specifically to RCW 68.50.160, which governs the right to control the disposition of the remains of a deceased person.”
Fox v. City of Bellingham, 482 P.3d 897 (Wash. 2021). “Fox, as the brother of the deceased, who is not the custodian of his brother’s remains under RCW 68.50.160, is an improper party to bring this suit.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 68.50.160(3)(d) — 2 cases
Newlon v. Alexander, 272 P.3d 903 (Wash. Ct. App. 2012). “" RCW 68.50.160(3)(d), A coroner may "hold an inquest upon a body" and may authorize dissection in those cases.”
In re the Marriage of Newlon, 167 Wash. App. 195 (Wash. Ct. App. 2012). “” RCW 68.50.160(3)(d). A coroner may “hold an inquest upon [a] body” and may authorize dissection in those cases.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 68.50.160(3)(e) — 1 case
Keith Dahl v. Gina Fino & Pac. Nw Forensic Pathologists (Wash. Ct. App. 2019). “105 nor RCW 68.50.160 contemplate a specific duty regarding the performance of an autopsy to a particular and circumscribed class of persons, the legislative intent exception does not apply here.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 68.50.160(5) — 2 cases
Whitney v. Cervantes, 328 P.3d 957 (Wash. Ct. App. 2014). “To *71 execute this right, “[a] valid written document expressing the decedent’s wishes regarding the place or method of disposition of his or her remains, signed by the decedent in the presence of a witness, is sufficient legal authorization for the procedures to be…”
Theresa Whitney v. Cecilia Cervantes (Wash. Ct. App. 2014). “While the right to control disposition of a body arose out of common law, it is no,",:, codified by statute in RCW 68.50.160. 3 A person has the right to control the disposition The Washington Supreme Court in Herz! noted that the right of custody over a 3 dead body and disposal…”
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.