Wash. Rev. Code » Title 7 · Chapter 7.16
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 7.16.350 (2026)

Appellate review

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
From a final judgment in the superior court, in any such proceeding, appellate review by the supreme court or the court of appeals may be sought as in other actions.
[ 1988 c 202 s 4; 1971 c 81 s 30; 1895 c 65 s 35; RRS s 1033.]

Notes:

Severability—1988 c 202: See note following RCW 2.24.050.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7 cases, 1976–2014 · leading case: Fed. Way Sch. Dist. No. 210 v. Vinson, 261 P.3d 145 (Wash. 2011).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Fed. Way Sch. Dist. No. 210 v. Vinson, 261 P.3d 145 (Wash. 2011). · cites it 2× “The Court of Appeals granted the motion for reconsideration and withdrew its original opinion, holding that it had jurisdiction pursuant to RCW 7.16.350 and RAP 2.2(a)(1). Fed. Way Sch.”
City of Seattle v. Williams, 680 P.2d 1051 (Wash. 1984). · cites it 2× “RCW 7.16.350, which provided for a right to appeal from a superior court decision on a writ of review, was superseded by RAP 2.”
Lutheran Day Care v. Snohomish Cnty., 829 P.2d 746 (Wash. 1992). “Therefore, although the certiorari and damages causes of action were included by appellant in the same complaint, they were necessarily decided separately.”
Fed. Way Sch. Dist. No. 210 v. Vinson, 225 P.3d 379 (Wash. Ct. App. 2010). · cites it 2× “RAP 2.1(b) provides, “The procedure for seeking review of trial court decisions established by these rules supersedes the review procedure formerly available by extraordinary writs of .”
Brower v. Charles, 914 P.2d 1202 (Wash. Ct. App. 1996). “A writ of prohibition is a special proceeding under RCW Ch. 7.16.”
State v. Houser, 556 P.2d 556 (Wash. Ct. App. 1976). · cites it 2× “RCW 7.16.350 mandates that From a final judgment in the superior court, in any such proceeding, an appeal shall lie to the supreme court or the court of appeals.”
Thomas Ogden v. Wa State Crim. Just. Training Commision (Wash. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 2× “RCW 7.16.350. Otherwise, the court's ruling is a final determination of the parties' rights.”
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.