Wash. Rev. Code » Title 7 · Chapter 7.24

Wash. Rev. Code § 7.24.146

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
This chapter shall apply to all actions and proceedings now pending in the courts of record of the state of Washington seeking relief under the terms of the uniform declaratory judgments act [this chapter]; and all judgments heretofore rendered; and all such actions and proceedings heretofore instituted and now pending in said courts of record of the state of Washington, seeking such relief, are hereby validated, and the respective courts of record in said actions shall have jurisdiction and power to proceed in said actions and to declare the rights, status and other legal relations sought to have been declared in said pending actions and proceedings in accordance with the provisions of said chapter. This chapter does not apply to state agency action reviewable under chapter 34.05 RCW.
[ 1989 c 175 s 39; 1937 c 14 s 2; RRS s 784-17.]

Notes:

Effective date—1989 c 175: See note following RCW 34.05.010.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 9 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2001–2025 · leading case: Davidson Serles & Associates v. City of Kirkland
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Davidson Serles & Associates v. City of Kirkland (2011) washctapp “Thus, had Davidson properly brought its challenge before the Board, the UDJA could not be utilized to appeal the Board’s decision on Davidson’s claim. It would be incongruous, then, to allow Davidson to utilize the UDJA to raise the claim herein in superior court, considering…”
Evergreen Washington Healthcare Frontier, LLC v. Department of Social & Health Services (2012) washctapp “360 (writs of mandamus and certiorari); RCW 7.24.146 (declaratory judgments). Our Supreme Court has held that failure to pursue APA review bars claims for a writ of mandamus or a declaratory judgment: Appellant’s loss of the remedy provided by the APA through failure to file a…”
DAVIDSON SERLES v. City of Kirkland (2011) washctapp “It would be incongruous, then, to allow Davidson to utilize the UDJA to raise the claim herein in superior court, considering that the UDJA would be unavailable to Davidson had the claim properly been brought before the Board in the first instance.”
Northwest Ecosystems Alliance v. Department of Ecology (2001) washctapp “” RCW 7.24.146. 10 Although the trial court did not specifically address the Appellants’ UDJA claims, “an appellate court may sustain a trial court on any correct ground, even though that ground was not considered by the trial court.”
John Worthington, App./cross-res. v. Wa State Liquor & Cannabis Board, Res/cross-app. (2017) washctapp · cites it 2× “The WSLCB argued in its response brief to the superior court, and again to this court, that RCW 7.24.146 precluded Worthington from seeking relief under the UDJA.”
Bainbridge Citizens United v. State, Dept. of Natural Resources (2008) washctapp · cites it 4× “Second, United does not question the construction or validity of a law and, therefore, the action falls outside the UDJA's scope.”
Preserve Responsible Shoreline, V City Of Bainbridge Island (2019) washctapp “510 dictates that judicial review under the APA provided the only avenue for relief and that RCW 7.24.146 instructs that the UDJA does not apply to state agency actions reviewable under the APA.”
National Association Of Veterinary Technicians In America (2025) washctapp “” RCW 7.24.146. The Associations argue that, because no rule was formalized at the time of dismissal, the Veterinary Board’s actions were not reviewable under the APA and were thus subject to challenge under the UDJA.”
Northwest Ecosystem Alliance v. Doe (2001) washctapp “" RCW 7.24.146. [10] Although the trial court did not specifically address the Appellants' UDJA claims, "an appellate court may sustain a trial court on any correct ground, even though that ground was not considered by the trial court.”
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.