Wash. Rev. Code » Title 7 · Chapter 7.04A
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 7.04A.080 (2026)

Provisional remedies

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(1) Before an arbitrator is appointed and is authorized and able to act, the court, upon motion of a party to an arbitration proceeding and for good cause shown, may enter an order for provisional remedies to protect the effectiveness of the arbitration proceeding to the same extent and under the same conditions as if the controversy were the subject of a civil action.
(2) After an arbitrator is appointed and is authorized and able to act, the arbitrator may issue such orders for provisional remedies, including interim awards, as the arbitrator finds necessary to protect the effectiveness of the arbitration proceeding and to promote the fair and expeditious resolution of the controversy, to the same extent and under the same conditions as if the controversy were the subject of a civil action. After an arbitrator is appointed and is authorized and able to act, a party to an arbitration proceeding may move the court for a provisional remedy only if the matter is urgent and the arbitrator is not able to act timely or if the arbitrator cannot provide an adequate remedy.
(3) A motion to a court for a provisional remedy under subsection (1) or (2) of this section does not waive any right of arbitration.
[ 2005 c 433 s 8.]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1 case (1 in the last 5 years), 2025–2025 · leading case: Kenneth Bryant, V. William Bryant (Wash. Ct. App. 2025).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Kenneth Bryant, V. William Bryant (Wash. Ct. App. 2025). · cites it 2× “070(6), when the court compelled arbitration, it needed to stay further 4 Kenneth argues the trial court erred by compelling arbitration.”
Wash. Rev. Code § 7.04A.080(1): 1 case
Kenneth Bryant, V. William Bryant (Wash. Ct. App. 2025). “070(6), when the court compelled arbitration, it needed to stay further 4 Kenneth argues the trial court erred by compelling arbitration.”
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.