Wash. Rev. Code » Title 7 · Chapter 7.48
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 7.48.140 (2026)

Public nuisances enumerated

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
It is a public nuisance:
(1) To cause or suffer the carcass of any animal or any offal, filth, or noisome substance to be collected, deposited, or to remain in any place to the prejudice of others;
(2) To throw or deposit any offal or other offensive matter, or the carcass of any dead animal, in any watercourse, stream, lake, pond, spring, well, or common sewer, street, or public highway, or in any manner to corrupt or render unwholesome or impure the water of any such spring, stream, pond, lake, or well, to the injury or prejudice of others;
(3) To obstruct or impede, without legal authority, the passage of any river, harbor, or collection of water;
(4) To obstruct or encroach upon public highway, private ways, streets, alleys, commons, landing places, and ways to burying places or to unlawfully obstruct or impede the flow of municipal transit vehicles as defined in RCW 46.04.355 or passenger traffic, access to municipal transit vehicles or stations as defined in *RCW 9.91.025(2)(a), or otherwise interfere with the provision or use of public transportation services, or obstruct or impede a municipal transit driver, operator, or supervisor in the performance of that individual's duties;
(5) To carry on the business of manufacturing gun powder, nitroglycerine, or other highly explosive substance, or mixing or grinding the materials therefor, in any building within fifty rods of any valuable building erected at the time such business may be commenced;
(6) To establish powder magazines near incorporated cities or towns, at a point different from that appointed by the corporate authorities of such city or town; or within fifty rods of any occupied dwelling house;
(7) To erect, continue, or use any building, or other place, for the exercise of any trade, employment, or manufacture, which, by occasioning obnoxious exhalations, offensive smells, or otherwise is offensive or dangerous to the health of individuals or of the public;
(8) To suffer or maintain on one's own premises, or upon the premises of another, or to permit to be maintained on one's own premises, any place where wines, spirituous, fermented, malt, or other intoxicating liquors are kept for sale or disposal to the public in contravention of law;
(9) For an owner or occupier of land, knowing of the existence of a well, septic tank, cesspool, or other hole or excavation ten inches or more in width at the top and four feet or more in depth, to fail to cover, fence or fill the same, or provide other proper and adequate safeguards: PROVIDED, That this section shall not apply to a hole one hundred square feet or more in area or one that is open, apparent, and obvious.
Every person who has the care, government, management, or control of any building, structure, powder magazine, or any other place mentioned in this section shall, for the purposes of this section, be taken and deemed to be the owner or agent of the owner or owners of such building, structure, powder magazine or other place, and, as such, may be proceeded against for erecting, contriving, causing, continuing, or maintaining such nuisance.
[ 1994 c 45 s 2; 1955 c 237 s 1; 1895 c 14 s 1; Code 1881 s 1246; RRS s 9913.]

Notes:

*Reviser's note: The reference to RCW 9.91.025(2)(a) appears to be erroneous. Reference to RCW 9.91.025(2) was apparently intended.
Findings—Declaration—1994 c 45: "The legislature finds that it is important to the general welfare to protect and preserve public safety in the operation of public transportation facilities and vehicles, in order to protect the personal safety of both passengers and employees. The legislature further finds that public transportation facilities and services will be utilized more fully by the general public if they are assured of personal safety and security in the utilization.
The legislature recognizes that cities, towns, counties, public transportation benefit areas, and other municipalities that offer public transportation services have the independent authority to adopt regulations, rules, and guidelines that regulate conduct in public transportation vehicles and facilities to protect and preserve the public safety in the operation of the vehicles and facilities. The legislature finds that this act is not intended to limit the independent authority to regulate conduct by these municipalities. The legislature, however, further finds that this act is necessary to provide statewide guidelines that regulate conduct in public transportation vehicles and facilities to further enhance the independent regulatory authority of cities, towns, counties, public transportation benefit areas, and any other municipalities that offer public transportation services." [ 1994 c 45 s 1.]
Severability—1994 c 45: "If any provision of this act or its application to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of the act or the application of the provision to other persons or circumstances is not affected." [ 1994 c 45 s 6.]
Crimes
malicious mischief: Chapter 9.61 RCW.
nuisance: Chapter 9.66 RCW.
Devices simulating traffic control signs declared public nuisance: RCW 47.36.180.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 23 cases (9 in the last 5 years), 1953–2025 · leading case: Grundy v. Thurston Cnty., 117 P.3d 1089 (Wash. 2005).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Grundy v. Thurston Cnty., 117 P.3d 1089 (Wash. 2005). · cites it 3× “¶ 33 RCW 7.48.140 is titled "[p]ublic nuisances enumerated.”
Grundy v. Thurston Cnty., 155 Wash. 2d 1 (Wash. 2005). · cites it 3× “¶33 RCW 7.48.140 is titled “[p]ublic nuisances enumerated.”
Chelan Basin Conservancy v. GBI Holding Co., 413 P.3d 549 (Wash. 2018). · cites it 4× “RCW 7.48.140. An action seeking the removal of an impediment on a waterway because it interferes with the public's right to use that waterway is simply a specific type of public nuisance action.”
Hostetler v. Ward, 704 P.2d 1193 (Wash. Ct. App. 1985). · cites it 2× “” See also RCW 7.48.140 (enumerating certain public nuisances).”
Animal Legal Def. Fund v. Olympic Game Farm, Inc., 533 P.3d 1170 (Wash. 2023). · cites it 4× “RCW 7.48.140. In this matter, we do not address when or whether a government entity may abate a public nuisance or bring a civil action against a person committing a public nuisance.”
Animal Legal Def. Fund v. Olympic Game Farm, Inc., 387 F. Supp. 3d 1202 (W.D. Wash. 2019). · cites it 2× “See Wash. Rev. Code § 7.48.140 ; see also 6A Washington Practice: Washington Pattern Jury Instructions - Civil, WPI 380.”
City of Seattle v. Monsanto Co., 237 F. Supp. 3d 1096 (W.D. Wash. 2017). “” RCW 7.48.140(2) specifically declares that it is a public nuisance to “in any planner .”
Turner v. City of Tacoma, 435 P.2d 927 (Wash. 1967). · cites it 2× “Inasmuch as the fire escape came down and obstructed the sidewalk, it was in violation of the State Code (RCW 7.48.140(4)). Furthermore, it was in violation of the City Code then in effect[ 3 ] Ordinance No.”
Clark v. United States, 660 F. Supp. 1164 (W.D. Wash. 1987). “And the first *1185 of those—I don’t know the date it was passed, but it was an old statute—is the nuisance statute, RCW 7.48.140, and in particular, subsection (2), that declares it to be a public nuisance to “in any manner to corrupt or render unwholesome or impure the water…”
Sauk-suiattle Indian Tribe, V. City Of Seattle, 525 P.3d 238 (Wash. Ct. App. 2023). “A public nuisance requires either a violation of one of the statutorily enumerated public nuisances in RCW 7.48.140, or for the plaintiff to show that the nuisance activity “affects equally the rights of an entire community or neighborhood, although the extent of the damage may…”
City of Benton City v. Adrian, 748 P.2d 679 (Wash. Ct. App. 1988). “Unchallenged finding of fact 7 states: That the discharge irrigation water poses a threat of damage to the sanitary sewer system through silting of the lines and damage to the plant; a threat of substantial erosion to 9th Avenue; by its erosion exposing and threatening the…”
City of Seattle v. Fender, 254 P.2d 470 (Wash. 1953). · cites it 2× “" RCW 7.48.140. "PUBLIC NUISANCES ENUMERATED.”
Show all 23 citing cases →
— Wash. Rev. Code § 7.48.140(2) — 4 cases
City of Seattle v. Monsanto Co., 237 F. Supp. 3d 1096 (W.D. Wash. 2017). “” RCW 7.48.140(2) specifically declares that it is a public nuisance to “in any planner .”
Charles & Janice Wolfe, V State Dept Of Transp. (Wash. Ct. App. 2018).
Animal Legal Def. Fund v. Olympic Game Farm Inc (W.D. Wash. 2022).
City of Seattle v. Monsanto Co. (W.D. Wash. 2024).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 7.48.140(3) — 7 cases
Grundy v. Thurston Cnty., 117 P.3d 1089 (Wash. 2005). “¶ 33 RCW 7.48.140 is titled "[p]ublic nuisances enumerated.”
Grundy v. Thurston Cnty., 155 Wash. 2d 1 (Wash. 2005). “¶33 RCW 7.48.140 is titled “[p]ublic nuisances enumerated.”
Chelan Basin Conservancy v. GBI Holding Co., 413 P.3d 549 (Wash. 2018). “RCW 7.48.140. An action seeking the removal of an impediment on a waterway because it interferes with the public's right to use that waterway is simply a specific type of public nuisance action.”
Animal Legal Def. Fund v. Olympic Game Farm, Inc., 533 P.3d 1170 (Wash. 2023). “RCW 7.48.140. In this matter, we do not address when or whether a government entity may abate a public nuisance or bring a civil action against a person committing a public nuisance.”
Chelan Basin Conservancy v. GBI Holding Co., 378 P.3d 222 (Wash. Ct. App. 2016).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 7.48.140(4) — 4 cases
Turner v. City of Tacoma, 435 P.2d 927 (Wash. 1967). “Inasmuch as the fire escape came down and obstructed the sidewalk, it was in violation of the State Code (RCW 7.48.140(4)). Furthermore, it was in violation of the City Code then in effect[ 3 ] Ordinance No.”
Frisch v. Pub. Util. Dist. No. 1, 507 P.2d 1201 (Wash. Ct. App. 1973).
Chan v. Grubhub Holdings Inc (W.D. Wash. 2024).
City of SeaTac v. Avis Budget Car Rental LLC (W.D. Wash. 2025).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 7.48.140(6) — 2 cases
Animal Legal Def. Fund v. Olympic Game Farm, Inc., 533 P.3d 1170 (Wash. 2023). “RCW 7.48.140. In this matter, we do not address when or whether a government entity may abate a public nuisance or bring a civil action against a person committing a public nuisance.”
Animal Legal Def. Fund v. Olympic Game Farm Inc (W.D. Wash. 2022).
— Wash. Rev. Code § 7.48.140(8) — 1 case
Hostetler v. Ward, 704 P.2d 1193 (Wash. Ct. App. 1985). “” See also RCW 7.48.140 (enumerating certain public nuisances).”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 7.48.140(9) — 1 case
Charles & Janice Wolfe, V State Dept Of Transp. (Wash. Ct. App. 2018).
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.