Wash. Rev. Code » Title 7 · Chapter 7.04A

Wash. Rev. Code § 7.04A.240

Modification or correction of award

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(1) Upon motion filed within ninety days after the movant receives notice of the award in a record under RCW 7.04A.190 or within ninety days after the movant receives notice of an arbitrator's award in a record on a motion to modify or correct an award under RCW 7.04A.200, the court shall modify or correct the award if:
(a) There was an evident mathematical miscalculation or an evident mistake in the description of a person, thing, or property referred to in the award;
(b) The arbitrator has made an award on a claim not submitted to the arbitrator and the award may be corrected without affecting the merits of the decision upon the claims submitted; or
(c) The award is imperfect in a matter of form not affecting the merits of the decision on the claims submitted.
(2) If a motion filed under subsection (1) of this section is granted, the court shall modify or correct and confirm the award as modified or corrected. Otherwise, the court shall confirm the award.
(3) A motion to modify or correct an award under this section may be joined with a motion to vacate the award.
[ 2005 c 433 s 24.]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12 cases (7 in the last 5 years), 2008–2025 · leading case: Cummings v. Budget Tank Removal & Environmental Services, LLC
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Cummings v. Budget Tank Removal & Environmental Services, LLC (2011) washctapp · cites it 3× “He says that the arbitrator must have overlooked the additional interest that necessarily accumulated in the two months between the interim award and the final award. Dougherty defends the amended judgment as necessary to correct an “evident mathematical miscalculation.”
Morrell v. WEDBUSH MORGAN SECURITIES INC. (2008) washctapp · cites it 2× “The trial court can modify an arbitration award where: (a) There was an evident mathematical miscalculation or an evident mistake in the description of a person, thing, or property referred to in the award; (b) The arbitrator has made an award on a claim not submitted to the…”
Morrell v. Wedbush Morgan Securities, Inc. (2008) washctapp “RCW 7.04A.240(l)(b); but see RCW 7.04A.230(l)(d) (court may vacate award if arbitrator exceeded powers).”
Lu Management Investment Inc, V. Yuan's H&h Property, Llc (2025) washctapp · cites it 3× “ANALYSIS LMI avers in its opening brief that the trial court erred when it confirmed the arbitration award and seeks modification of the award due to purported facial legal and mathematical errors under RCW 7.04A.240. 8 The Yuan Claimants counter 8 The Yuan Claimants filed a…”
David W. Newell v. Providence Health & Services (2019) washctapp · cites it 2× “Instead, perceived errors in the form of the award are addressed in RCW 7.04A.240, which provides only that “the [superior] court shall modify or correct the award if.”
In Re The Marriage Of: Kristin N. Harper, Res. And Benjamin Stoner-duncan, App. (2023) washctapp · cites it 2× “As relevant here, modification is required where “[t]here was an evident mathematical miscalculation or an evident mistake in the description of a person, thing, or property referred to in the award.”
Bradley Feldman, V, Darren Williams (2024) washctapp · cites it 2× “” RCW 7.04A.240(1)(c). Superior courts may submit the claim to the arbitrator to modify or correct an award.”
Wang v. Esurance Insurance Company (2025) wawd · cites it 2× “230(1) and RCW 7.04A.240(1), and only when those grounds appear on the face of the 21 award.”
Marvin Olsen, Et Ux v. H. Gary Wallis, Et Ux (2017) washctapp “230 or to modify or correct the award under RCW 7.04A.240. Those statues provide specific grounds for modifying, correcting, or vacating arbitration awards.”
Cascade Designs, Inc., Respondent/cr-appellant V. Robert Lerner, Appellant/cr-respondent (2021) washctapp “04A RCW, courts may only modify an arbitration award on one of the narrow statutory grounds listed in RCW 7.04A.240(1)(a)-(c), or vacate the award for the limited reasons in RCW 7.”
Mezzanine Properties, Inc., V. Bkco Title And Escrow, Llc (2024) washctapp “04A RCW, courts may modify an arbitration award on one of the narrow statutory grounds listed in RCW 7.04A.240(1) or vacate the award for the limited reasons in RCW 7.”
Brooke Anderson, V. Customarray (2025) washctapp “Similarly, RCW 7.04A.240 requires a motion to modify or correct an award by filed within 90 days.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 7.04A.240(1) — 3 cases
Cummings v. Budget Tank Removal & Environmental Services, LLC (2011) washctapp “He says that the arbitrator must have overlooked the additional interest that necessarily accumulated in the two months between the interim award and the final award. Dougherty defends the amended judgment as necessary to correct an “evident mathematical miscalculation.”
Wang v. Esurance Insurance Company (2025) wawd “230(1) and RCW 7.04A.240(1), and only when those grounds appear on the face of the 21 award.”
Mezzanine Properties, Inc., V. Bkco Title And Escrow, Llc (2024) washctapp “04A RCW, courts may modify an arbitration award on one of the narrow statutory grounds listed in RCW 7.04A.240(1) or vacate the award for the limited reasons in RCW 7.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 7.04A.240(1)(a) — 5 cases
Cummings v. Budget Tank Removal & Environmental Services, LLC (2011) washctapp “He says that the arbitrator must have overlooked the additional interest that necessarily accumulated in the two months between the interim award and the final award. Dougherty defends the amended judgment as necessary to correct an “evident mathematical miscalculation.”
Morrell v. WEDBUSH MORGAN SECURITIES INC. (2008) washctapp “The trial court can modify an arbitration award where: (a) There was an evident mathematical miscalculation or an evident mistake in the description of a person, thing, or property referred to in the award; (b) The arbitrator has made an award on a claim not submitted to the…”
Lu Management Investment Inc, V. Yuan's H&h Property, Llc (2025) washctapp “ANALYSIS LMI avers in its opening brief that the trial court erred when it confirmed the arbitration award and seeks modification of the award due to purported facial legal and mathematical errors under RCW 7.04A.240. 8 The Yuan Claimants counter 8 The Yuan Claimants filed a…”
Cascade Designs, Inc., Respondent/cr-appellant V. Robert Lerner, Appellant/cr-respondent (2021) washctapp “04A RCW, courts may only modify an arbitration award on one of the narrow statutory grounds listed in RCW 7.04A.240(1)(a)-(c), or vacate the award for the limited reasons in RCW 7.”
In Re The Marriage Of: Kristin N. Harper, Res. And Benjamin Stoner-duncan, App. (2023) washctapp “As relevant here, modification is required where “[t]here was an evident mathematical miscalculation or an evident mistake in the description of a person, thing, or property referred to in the award.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 7.04A.240(1)(b) — 1 case
Morrell v. WEDBUSH MORGAN SECURITIES INC. (2008) washctapp “The trial court can modify an arbitration award where: (a) There was an evident mathematical miscalculation or an evident mistake in the description of a person, thing, or property referred to in the award; (b) The arbitrator has made an award on a claim not submitted to the…”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 7.04A.240(1)(c) — 1 case
Bradley Feldman, V, Darren Williams (2024) washctapp “” RCW 7.04A.240(1)(c). Superior courts may submit the claim to the arbitrator to modify or correct an award.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 7.04A.240(c) — 1 case
David W. Newell v. Providence Health & Services (2019) washctapp “Instead, perceived errors in the form of the award are addressed in RCW 7.04A.240, which provides only that “the [superior] court shall modify or correct the award if.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 7.04A.240(l)(b) — 1 case
Morrell v. Wedbush Morgan Securities, Inc. (2008) washctapp “RCW 7.04A.240(l)(b); but see RCW 7.04A.230(l)(d) (court may vacate award if arbitrator exceeded powers).”
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.