Wash. Rev. Code » Title 7 · Chapter 7.24
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 7.24.020 (2026)

Rights and status under written instruments, statutes, ordinances

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
A person interested under a deed, will, written contract or other writings constituting a contract, or whose rights, status or other legal relations are affected by a statute, municipal ordinance, contract or franchise, may have determined any question of construction or validity arising under the instrument, statute, ordinance, contract or franchise and obtain a declaration of rights, status or other legal relations thereunder.
[ 1935 c 113 s 2; RRS s 784-2.]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 143 cases (36 in the last 5 years), 1954–2026 · leading case: Wash. State Hous. Fin. Comm'n v. Nat'l Homebuyers Fund, Inc., 445 P.3d 533 (Wash. 2019).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Wash. State Hous. Fin. Comm'n v. Nat'l Homebuyers Fund, Inc., 445 P.3d 533 (Wash. 2019). · cites it 4× “whose rights, status or other legal relations are affected by a statute . . . may have determined any question of construction or validity arising under the .”
To-Ro Trade Shows v. Collins, 27 P.3d 1149 (Wash. 2001). · cites it 2× “" RCW 7.24.020. In Diversified Industries Development Corp.”
To-Ro Trade Shows v. Collins, 144 Wash. 2d 403 (Wash. 2001). · cites it 2× “” RCW 7.24.020. In Diversified Industries Development Corp.”
Nelson v. Appleway Chevrolet, Inc., 157 P.3d 847 (Wash. 2007). · cites it 3× “RCW 7.24.020. See also State ex rel. Lyon v.”
Nelson v. Appleway Chevrolet, Inc., 160 Wash. 2d 173 (Wash. 2007). · cites it 3× “whose rights, status or other legal relations are affected by a statute, municipal ordinance, contract or franchise, may have determined any question of construction or validity arising under the instrument, statute, ordinance, contract or franchise and obtain a declaration of…”
State Ex Rel. Graham v. Northshore Sch. Dist. No. 417, 662 P.2d 38 (Wash. 1983). · cites it 4× “RCW 7.24.020 provides that a "person interested under a .”
Bainbridge Citizens United v. Dep't of Nat. Resources, 198 P.3d 1033 (Wash. Ct. App. 2008). · cites it 5× “¶20 The UDJA provides that [a] person interested under a deed, will, written contract or other writings constituting a contract, or whose rights, status or other legal relations are affected by a statute, municipal ordinance, contract or franchise, may have determined any…”
Hornish Trust v. King Cnty., 899 F.3d 680 (9th Cir. 2018). · cites it 2× “The panel held that the plaintiffs, landowners whose properties abutted the rail corridor’s boundaries, lacked both Article III and statutory standing to bring their claim for a declaratory judgment pursuant to Wash. Rev. Code § 7.24.020 because they lacked any property…”
DiNino v. State, 684 P.2d 1297 (Wash. 1984). · cites it 4× “Piper brought suit against the State under the Uniform Declaratory Judgments Act, RCW 7.24.020, seeking a declaration that her directive was valid and enforceable and that no physician would be civilly or criminally liable for following it.”
Yakima Cnty. (West Valley) Fire Prot. Dist. No. 12 v. City of Yakima, 858 P.2d 245 (Wash. 1993). · cites it 2× “The persons entitled to seek a declaratory judgment are described in RCW 7.24.020: A person interested under a deed, will, written contract or other writings constituting a contract, or whose rights, status or other legal relations are affected by a statute, municipal ordinance,…”
Branson v. Port of Seattle, 152 Wash. 2d 862 (Wash. 2004). · cites it 2× “RCW 7.24.020. In addition, the UDJA allows for an interested person to have any question arising under the validity of a contract determined, so long as the UDJA’s underlying requirements are met.”
Branson v. Port of Seattle, 101 P.3d 67 (Wash. 2004). · cites it 2× “RCW 7.24.020. In addition, the UDJA allows for an interested person to have any question arising under the validity of a contract determined, so long as the UDJA's underlying requirements are met.”
Show all 143 citing cases →
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.