Wash. Rev. Code » Title 7 · Chapter 7.68
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 7.68.110 (2026)

Appeals

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
The provisions contained in chapter 51.52 RCW relating to appeals shall govern appeals under this chapter: PROVIDED, That no provision contained in chapter 51.52 RCW concerning employers as parties to any settlement, appeal, or other action shall apply to this chapter: PROVIDED FURTHER, That appeals taken from a decision of the board of industrial insurance appeals under this chapter shall be governed by the provisions relating to judicial review of administrative decisions contained in RCW 34.05.510 through 34.05.598, and the department shall have the same right of review from a decision of the board of industrial insurance appeals as does the claimant: PROVIDED FURTHER, That the time in which to file a protest or appeal from any order, decision, or award under this chapter shall be ninety days from the date the order, decision, or award is communicated to the parties.
[ 1997 c 102 s 1; 1989 c 175 s 40; 1977 ex.s. c 302 s 7; 1975 1st ex.s. c 176 s 5; 1973 1st ex.s. c 122 s 11.]

Notes:

Effective date—1989 c 175: See note following RCW 34.05.010.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 14 cases, 1979–2017 · leading case: Dep't of Labor & Indus. v. Gongyin, 154 Wash. 2d 38 (Wash. 2005).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Dep't of Labor & Indus. v. Gongyin, 154 Wash. 2d 38 (Wash. 2005). · cites it 6× “130 does not provide for attorney fees in appellate cases under the CVCA because the provisions of RCW 7.68.110 govern. ¶24 Under RCW 7.68.110, the provisions of chapter 51.”
Dep't of Labor & Indus. v. Gongyin, 109 P.3d 816 (Wash. 2005). · cites it 6× “130 does not provide for attorney fees in appellate cases under the CVCA because the provisions of RCW 7.68.110 govern. ¶ 24 Under RCW 7.68.”
Standing v. Dep't of Labor & Indus., 598 P.2d 725 (Wash. 1979). · cites it 2× “Standing appealed the Department's order to the Board of Industrial Insurance Appeals (Board) pursuant to RCW 7.68.110. The parties stipulated that the sole issue on appeal was the constitutionality of RCW 7.”
Danzer v. Dep't of Labor & Indus., 16 P.3d 35 (Wash. Ct. App. 2000). · cites it 2× “[t]o adjudicative proceedings of the board of industrial insurance appeals except as provided in RCW 7.68.110 and 51.48.131U”). RCW 34.05.”
Mason v. Georgia-Pac. Corp., 271 P.3d 381 (Wash. Ct. App. 2012). “05 RCW, do not apply “[t]o adjudicative proceedings of the board of industrial insurance appeals except as provided in RCW 7.68.110 and 51.48.131.” 4 Former RCW 51.”
Hill v. Dep't of Labor & Indus., 161 Wash. App. 286 (Wash. Ct. App. 2011). “030(2)(a), the judicial review provisions of the Administrative Procedure Act, do not apply “[t]o adjudicative proceedings of the board of industrial insurance appeals except as provided in RCW 7.68.110 and 51.48.131.” The legislature amended RCW 51.”
State v. Davis, 605 P.2d 359 (Wash. Ct. App. 1980). “RCW 7.68.110. Other than Shari Gates' testimony, the trial court was not provided with any other testimony from that appeal, nor the findings of fact, conclusions of law and order of the board.”
Hill v. Dep't of Labor & Indus., 253 P.3d 430 (Wash. Ct. App. 2011). “030(2)(a), the judicial review provisions of the Administrative Procedure Act, chapter 34.”
L.H. v. Dep't of Labor & Indus., 940 P.2d 657 (Wash. Ct. App. 1996). “RCW 7.68.110. This court will grant relief if the BIIA erroneously interpreted or applied the law.”
Robles v. Dep't of Labor & Indus., 739 P.2d 727 (Wash. Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 2× “070(3) (a) and denied his claim. Robles appealed to the Superior Court for Thurston County.”
Stafford v. Dep't of Labor & Indus., 653 P.2d 1350 (Wash. Ct. App. 1982). “On appeal to superior court, the Board's order was affirmed. Claimant now asks us for review.”
Sebastian v. Dep't of Labor & Indus., 974 P.2d 374 (Wash. Ct. App. 1999). “Also under this method, the Department paid less than the statutory cap of $30,000. The Board of Industrial Insurance Appeals (the Board) affirmed the Department’s determination.”
Show all 14 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.