Wash. Rev. Code » Title 71 · Chapter 71.05
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 71.05.570 (2026)

Rules of court

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
The supreme court of the state of Washington shall adopt such rules as it shall deem necessary with respect to the court procedures and proceedings provided for by this chapter.
[ 1973 1st ex.s. c 142 s 62.]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6 cases, 1984–2013 · leading case: Dunner v. McLaughlin, 676 P.2d 444 (Wash. 1984).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Dunner v. McLaughlin, 676 P.2d 444 (Wash. 1984). “RCW 71.05.570. We have done so. Superior Court Mental Proceedings Rule 3.”
Sherwin v. Arveson, 633 P.2d 1335 (Wash. 2007). “1, promulgated pursuant to statutory authority to make rules for mental health proceedings (RCW 71.05.570), expressly provides that such proceedings shall be brought in the county in which the person is being detained.”
D.A.H. v. Seattle Times Co., 924 P.2d 49 (Wash. Ct. App. 1996). “Pursuant to the directive of RCW 71.05.570, however, the supreme court promulgated the Mental Proceedings Rules (MPR).”
In Re The Det. Of J.g. (Wash. Ct. App. 2013). “When it enacted the involuntary treatment act, the legislature conferred express authority on our Supreme Court to "adopt such rules as it shall deem necessary with respect to the court procedures and proceedings provided for by this chapter.”
In Re The Det. Of J.g. (Wash. Ct. App. 2013). “When it enacted the involuntary treatment act, the legislature conferred express authority on our Supreme Court to "adopt such rules as it shall deem necessary with respect to the court procedures and proceedings provided for by this chapter.”
Hurst v. L.G., 897 P.2d 1275 (Wash. Ct. App. 1995). “See RCW 71.05.570 (mental health commitment statute, which provides that the Supreme Court "shall adopt such rules as it shall deem necessary with respect to the court procedures and proceedings provided for by this chapter”).”
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.