Revised Code of Washington
Wash. Rev. Code § 7.24.070 (2026)
Review
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov
JustiaTitle on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
All orders, judgments and decrees under this chapter may be reviewed as other orders, judgments and decrees.
[ 1935 c 113 s 7; RRS s 784-7.]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 14
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1984–2025 · leading case: To-Ro Trade Shows v. Collins, 27 P.3d 1149 (Wash. 2001).
To-Ro Trade Shows v. Collins, 27 P.3d 1149 (Wash. 2001). “The trial court dismissed To-Ro's claims attacking the statute, and the Court of Appeals affirmed, denying relief under the Act.”
To-Ro Trade Shows v. Collins, 144 Wash. 2d 403 (Wash. 2001). “The trial court dismissed To-Ro’s claims attacking the statute, and the Court of Appeals affirmed,' denying relief under the Act.”
State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. William D. Morgan, 199 Wash. App. 435 (Wash. Ct. App. 2017). “3d 644 (2013) (citing RCW 7.24.070). When findings of fact and conclusions of law are entered following a bench trial, we review whether the findings are supported by substantial evidence and, if so, whether the findings support the trial court’s conclusions of law and judgment.”
Buck Mountain Owners' Ass'n v. Prestwich, 308 P.3d 644 (Wash. Ct. App. 2013). “The court also ruled that in any event, Bentley-Prestwich “never tendered the defense of [the Association’s] complaint for declaratory judgment to the Starr Trust.” The trial court denied Bentley-Prestwich’s reconsideration motions.”
Nollette v. Christianson, 800 P.2d 359 (Wash. 1990). “This court's prior decisions have not announced the appropriate standard of review in this situation. The Uniform Declaratory Judgments Act indicates only that " [a]ll orders, judgments and decrees under this chapter may be reviewed as other orders, judgments and decrees.”
Schneider v. Snyder's Foods, Inc., 66 P.3d 640 (Wash. Ct. App. 2003). “at 599 (quoting RCW 7.24.070). Thus, we determine if the trial court’s findings of fact were supported by substantial evidence in the record.”
Klassen v. Skamania Cnty., 831 P.2d 763 (Wash. Ct. App. 1992). “'" The court also concluded that the Landowners "transferred 'forest land,' plus cash, for 'non-forest' land (land under 20 acres).”
Friends & Land Owners Opposing Dev. v. Dep't of Ecology, 684 P.2d 765 (Wash. Ct. App. 1984). “Because judicial review in Superior Court was permitted in this case by a declaratory judgment action, we look to RCW 7.24.070, a portion of the Uniform Declaratory Judgments Act, which provides: Review.”
Schneider v. Snyder's Foods, Inc., 66 P.3d 640 (Wash. Ct. App. 2003). “2d 359 (quoting RCW 7.24.070). Thus, we determine if the trial court's findings of fact were supported by substantial evidence in the record.”
City of Spokane v. Spokane Civil Serv. Comm'n, 989 P.2d 1245 (Wash. Ct. App. 1999). “(quoting RCW 7.24.070 and Nollette v. Christianson, 115 Wn.”
Sharon Laska v. Maolei Zhu (Wash. Ct. App. 2017). “VIOLATION OF THE RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS Zhu also argues that the trial court erred in entering declaratory judgment because (a) the court’s finding that his storage shed was less than 900 square feet in area was not supported by substantial evidence and (b) the court improperly…”
Borton & Sons, Inc. v. Burbank Props., LLC (Wash. 2020). “Summary judgment is appropriate only when “there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and [] the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law.”
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.