Wash. Rev. Code » Title 7 · Chapter 7.70
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 7.70.010 (2026)

Declaration of modification of actions for damages based upon injuries resulting from health care

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
The state of Washington, exercising its police and sovereign power, hereby modifies as set forth in this chapter and in RCW 4.16.350, as now or hereafter amended, certain substantive and procedural aspects of all civil actions and causes of action, whether based on tort, contract, or otherwise, for damages for injury occurring as a result of health care which is provided after June 25, 1976.
[1975-'76 2nd ex.s. c 56 s 6.]

Notes:

Severability—1975-'76 2nd ex.s. c 56: See note following RCW 4.16.350.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 52 cases (13 in the last 5 years), 1982–2026 · leading case: Berger v. Sonneland, 26 P.3d 257 (Wash. 2001).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Berger v. Sonneland, 26 P.3d 257 (Wash. 2001). · cites it 6× “The objective symptomatology requirement, imposed to place limits on a tortfeasor's liability to bystanders, is not necessary to limit liability when the physician's liability is already limited by RCW 7.70.010 and the standard of care requirement of RCW 7.”
Berger v. Sonneland, 144 Wash. 2d 91 (Wash. 2001). · cites it 6× “The objective symptomatology requirement, imposed to place limits on a tortfeasor’s liability to bystanders, is not necessary to limit liability when the physician’s liability is already limited by RCW 7.70.010 and the standard of care requirement of RCW 7.”
Fast v. Kennewick Pub. Hosp. Dist., 384 P.3d 232 (Wash. 2016). · cites it 6× “350, as now or hereafter amended, certain substantive and procedural aspects of all civil actions and. causes of action, whether based on tort, contract, or otherwise, for damages for injury occurring as a result of health care which is provided after June 25, 1976.”
Denise Reagan, V St. Elmo Newton, Iii, Md, 436 P.3d 411 (Wash. Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 6× “RCW 7.70.010 states that the substantive and procedural requirements of chapter 7.”
Fast v. Kennewick Pub. Hosp. Dist., 354 P.3d 858 (Wash. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 4× “350 and RCW 7.70.010 both speak of “civil actions .”
Reyes v. Yakima Health Dist., 419 P.3d 819 (Wash. 2018). “The trial court denied the motion for reconsideration, stating it would not consider the second declaration and it would not have been sufficient to create a material issue of fact sufficient to survive summary judgment even if it were considered.”
Est. of Sly v. Linville, 878 P.2d 1241 (Wash. Ct. App. 1994). · cites it 3× “6 He also argues that under RCW 7.70.010, 7 any action brought against a health care practitioner is covered by the health care act of 1976.”
Reed v. Anm Health Care, 225 P.3d 1012 (Wash. Ct. App. 2008). · cites it 5× “Hulley argues that Reed’s alleged injuries occurred as a result of health care, so her remedies are limited by RCW 7.70.010, and that she has no viable claim under chapter 7.”
Berger v. Sonneland, 1 P.3d 1187 (Wash. Ct. App. 2000). · cites it 5× “Sonneland moved for summary judgment arguing that Washington's medical malpractice statute, RCW 7.70.010, subsumed all civil causes of action for injuries allegedly resulting from acts or omissions of a health care provider.”
Berger v. Sonneland, 101 Wash. App. 141 (Wash. Ct. App. 2000). · cites it 5× “Sonneland moved for summary judgment arguing that Washington’s medical malpractice statute, RCW 7.70.010, subsumed all civil causes of action for injuries allegedly resulting from acts or omissions of a health care provider.”
Sherman v. Kissinger, 146 Wash. App. 855 (Wash. Ct. App. 2008). · cites it 2× “RCW 7.70.010. ¶18 In adopting the act, the legislature expressly limited medical malpractice actions for injuries against health care providers to claims based on the failure to follow the accepted standard of care, the breach of an express promise by a health care provider, and…”
Sherman v. Kissinger, 195 P.3d 539 (Wash. Ct. App. 2008). · cites it 2× “RCW 7.70.010. ¶ 18 In adopting the act, the legislature expressly limited medical malpractice actions for injuries against health care providers to claims based on the failure to follow the accepted standard of care, the breach of an express promise by a health care provider,…”
Show all 52 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.