Revised Code of Washington
Wash. Rev. Code § 70.160.060 (2026)
Intent of chapter as applied to certain private workplaces
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov
JustiaTitle on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
This chapter is not intended to regulate smoking in a private enclosed workplace, within a public place, even though such workplace may be visited by nonsmokers, excepting places in which smoking is prohibited by the chief of the Washington state patrol, through the director of fire protection, or by other law, ordinance, or regulation.
Notes:
Effective date—1995 c 369: See note following RCW 43.43.930.
Severability—1986 c 266: See note following RCW 38.52.005.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5
cases, 2008–2013 · leading case: Am. Legion Post 149 v. WASH. DEPT. OF HEALTH, 192 P.3d 306 (Wash. 2008).
Am. Legion Post 149 v. WASH. DEPT. OF HEALTH, 192 P.3d 306 (Wash. 2008). “2, § 2; RCW 70.160.060. ś 3 In 2006, Washington voters enacted Initiative Measure 901.”
Am. Legion Post No. 149 v. Dep't of Health, 164 Wash. 2d 570 (Wash. 2008). “2, § 2; RCW 70.160.060. ¶3 In 2006, Washington voters enacted Initiative Measure 901.”
Utter v. Bldg. Indus. Ass'n, 310 P.3d 829 (Wash. Ct. App. 2013). “2, § 2; RCW 70.160.060). In 2006, Washington voters enacted Initiative Measure 901, which expanded the prohibition on smoking in public places by amending the definition of a “public place” to include facilities such as schools, bars, bowling alleys, and casinos.”
Amvets Post 711 v. Rutter, 863 F. Supp. 2d 670 (N.D. Ohio 2012). “28 § 1428; Wash. Rev.Code § 70.160.060; W.S.A. § 101.”
Robert F. Utter & Faith Ireland, App./x-resp. v. Bldg. Indus. Assoc. Of Wa, Resp./x-app. (Wash. Ct. App. 2013). “In 2006, Washington voters enacted Initiative Measure 901, which expanded the prohibition on smoking in public places by amending the definition of a "public place'" to include facilities such as schools, bars, bowling alleys, and casinos. \± at 581-82 (citing LAWS of 2006, ch.”
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.