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

Wash. Rev. Code § 7.04A.280 (2026)

Appeals

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(1) An appeal may be taken from:
(a) An order denying a motion to compel arbitration;
(b) An order granting a motion to stay arbitration;
(c) An order confirming or denying confirmation of an award;
(d) An order modifying or correcting an award;
(e) An order vacating an award without directing a rehearing; or
(f) A final judgment entered under this chapter.
(2) An appeal under this section must be taken as from an order or a judgment in a civil action.
[ 2005 c 433 s 28.]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 15 cases (4 in the last 5 years), 2009–2026 · leading case: Woodall v. Avalon Care Ctr.-Fed. Way, 231 P.3d 1252 (Wash. Ct. App. 2010).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Woodall v. Avalon Care Ctr.-Fed. Way, 231 P.3d 1252 (Wash. Ct. App. 2010). · cites it 2× “2d 1124 (1989); RCW 7.04A.280(1)(a). [4] RCW 7.04A.060(2); Satomi Owners Ass'n v.”
East Texas Salt Water Disposal Co. v. Werline, 307 S.W.3d 267 (Tex. 2010). “016; Wash. Rev.Code § 7.04A.280; Wyo. Stat. Ann.”
Woodall v. Avalon Care Ctr.—Fed. Way, LLC, 155 Wash. App. 919 (Wash. Ct. App. 2010). · cites it 2× “2d 1124 (1989); RCW 7.04A.280(1)(a). RCW 7.04A.060(2); Satomi Owners Ass’n v.”
Townsend v. Quadrant Corp., 153 Wash. App. 870 (Wash. Ct. App. 2009). “Quadrant appeals the order denying its motion to stay proceedings and to compel arbitration as a matter of right under RCW 7.04A.280(l)(a). Quadrant contends that an arbitrator, not a court, must decide whether the PSA was invalid for unconscionability.”
Townsend v. Quadrant Corp., 224 P.3d 818 (Wash. Ct. App. 2009). “Quadrant appeals the order denying its motion to stay proceedings and to compel arbitration as a matter of right under RCW 7.04A.280(1)(a). Quadrant contends that an arbitrator, not a court, must decide whether the PSA was invalid for unconscionability.”
Cummings v. Budget Tank Removal & Env't Servs., LLC, 260 P.3d 220 (Wash. Ct. App. 2011). “RCW 7.04A.280. ¶11 Dougherty’s challenge to reviewability is not well founded.”
Futureselect Portfolio Mgmt., Inc. v. Tremont Grp. Holdings, Inc., 413 P.3d 1 (Wash. 2018). “070(6) (providing that a court shall stay any judicial proceeding that involves a claim subject to the arbitration until the court renders a final decision), RCW 7.04A.280 (providing that an appeal may be taken from an order denying a motion to compel arbitration, without also…”
Garrett Ranches Llc v. Larry Honn Fam. Llc (Wash. Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 7× “RCW 7.04A.280 identifies six types of orders or judgments relating to arbitration from which appeal may be taken; an order compelling arbitration is not one of them.”
Maria Colacurcio v. Brent Frei, 455 P.3d 192 (Wash. Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 2× “150(6) addresses an arbitrator’s unavailability: “If an arbitrator ceases, or is unable, to act during the arbitration proceeding, a replacement arbitrator must be appointed in accordance with ROW 7.”
Lu Mgmt. Inv. Inc, V. Yuan's H&h Prop., Llc (Wash. Ct. App. 2025). · cites it 2× “RCW 7.04A.280 states that parties may appeal orders confirming, denying, modifying, correcting, vacating an arbitration award, or a final judgment on the award.”
Lonnie L. Burton, V. Securus Tech., D.b.a. Jpay, Llc (Wash. Ct. App. 2025). · cites it 2× “Therefore, the mere fact that there is a delegation clause in the parties’ agreement is not sufficient as a matter of law to require this court or the trial court to compel arbitration.”
Breanna Sanger, et ux v. MNM Ent., LLP d/b/a Max Air Tri-Cities (Wash. Ct. App. 2026). · cites it 2× “RCW 7.04A.280(1). Conspicuously absent from RCW 7.”
Show all 15 citing cases →
— Wash. Rev. Code § 7.04A.280(1) — 5 cases
Breanna Sanger, et ux v. MNM Ent., LLP d/b/a Max Air Tri-Cities (Wash. Ct. App. 2026). “RCW 7.04A.280(1). Conspicuously absent from RCW 7.”
Marvin Olsen, Et Ux v. H. Gary Wallis, Et Ux (Wash. Ct. App. 2017).
Maria Colacurcio v. Brent Frei, 455 P.3d 192 (Wash. Ct. App. 2019). “150(6) addresses an arbitrator’s unavailability: “If an arbitrator ceases, or is unable, to act during the arbitration proceeding, a replacement arbitrator must be appointed in accordance with ROW 7.”
In Re The Est. Of: Ronald Haave Sr. (Wash. Ct. App. 2023).
Garrett Ranches Llc v. Larry Honn Fam. Llc (Wash. Ct. App. 2013). “RCW 7.04A.280 identifies six types of orders or judgments relating to arbitration from which appeal may be taken; an order compelling arbitration is not one of them.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 7.04A.280(1)(a) — 5 cases
Woodall v. Avalon Care Ctr.-Fed. Way, 231 P.3d 1252 (Wash. Ct. App. 2010). “2d 1124 (1989); RCW 7.04A.280(1)(a). [4] RCW 7.04A.060(2); Satomi Owners Ass'n v.”
Woodall v. Avalon Care Ctr.—Fed. Way, LLC, 155 Wash. App. 919 (Wash. Ct. App. 2010). “2d 1124 (1989); RCW 7.04A.280(1)(a). RCW 7.04A.060(2); Satomi Owners Ass’n v.”
Townsend v. Quadrant Corp., 224 P.3d 818 (Wash. Ct. App. 2009). “Quadrant appeals the order denying its motion to stay proceedings and to compel arbitration as a matter of right under RCW 7.04A.280(1)(a). Quadrant contends that an arbitrator, not a court, must decide whether the PSA was invalid for unconscionability.”
Lonnie L. Burton, V. Securus Tech., D.b.a. Jpay, Llc (Wash. Ct. App. 2025). “Therefore, the mere fact that there is a delegation clause in the parties’ agreement is not sufficient as a matter of law to require this court or the trial court to compel arbitration.”
Townsend v. Quadrant Corp., 218 P.3d 230 (Wash. Ct. App. 2009).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 7.04A.280(1)(c) — 2 cases
Lu Mgmt. Inv. Inc, V. Yuan's H&h Prop., Llc (Wash. Ct. App. 2025). “RCW 7.04A.280 states that parties may appeal orders confirming, denying, modifying, correcting, vacating an arbitration award, or a final judgment on the award.”
Garrett Ranches Llc v. Larry Honn Fam. Llc (Wash. Ct. App. 2013). “RCW 7.04A.280 identifies six types of orders or judgments relating to arbitration from which appeal may be taken; an order compelling arbitration is not one of them.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 7.04A.280(2) — 1 case
Garrett Ranches Llc v. Larry Honn Fam. Llc (Wash. Ct. App. 2013). “RCW 7.04A.280 identifies six types of orders or judgments relating to arbitration from which appeal may be taken; an order compelling arbitration is not one of them.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 7.04A.280(c) — 1 case
Maria Colacurcio v. Brent Frei, 455 P.3d 192 (Wash. Ct. App. 2019). “150(6) addresses an arbitrator’s unavailability: “If an arbitrator ceases, or is unable, to act during the arbitration proceeding, a replacement arbitrator must be appointed in accordance with ROW 7.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 7.04A.280(l)(a) — 1 case
Townsend v. Quadrant Corp., 153 Wash. App. 870 (Wash. Ct. App. 2009). “Quadrant appeals the order denying its motion to stay proceedings and to compel arbitration as a matter of right under RCW 7.04A.280(l)(a). Quadrant contends that an arbitrator, not a court, must decide whether the PSA was invalid for unconscionability.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 7.04A.280(l)(f) — 1 case
Garrett Ranches Llc v. Larry Honn Fam. Llc (Wash. Ct. App. 2013). “RCW 7.04A.280 identifies six types of orders or judgments relating to arbitration from which appeal may be taken; an order compelling arbitration is not one of them.”
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.