Revised Code of Washington
Wash. Rev. Code § 80.36.230 (2026)
Exchange areas for telecommunications companies
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov
JustiaTitle on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
The commission is hereby granted the power to prescribe exchange area boundaries and/or territorial boundaries for telecommunications companies.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1981–2025 · leading case: Elec. Lightwave, Inc. v. Utils. & Transp. Comm'n, 869 P.2d 1045 (Wash. 1994).
Elec. Lightwave, Inc. v. Utils. & Transp. Comm'n, 869 P.2d 1045 (Wash. 1994). “It upheld the Commission’s approval of DDS’s and ELI’s respective applications but reversed the Commission’s reservation of "exclusive” rights for LEC’s on the ground the' Commission lacks authority under RCW 80.36.230 to confer exclusive rights.”
James Courtney v. Washington Util. & Transp. Comm'n, 414 P.3d 598 (Wash. Ct. App. 2018). “RCW 80.36.230 provides, “The commission is hereby granted the power to prescribe exchange area boundaries and/or territorial boundaries for telecommunications companies.”
Blue Dot Energy Co. v. United States, 76 Fed. Cl. 783 (Fed. Cl. 2004). “2d 1045 (1994), the Supreme Court of the State of Washington held that the “language [of Wash. Rev.Code § 80.36.230, a statute similar to Wash.”
Prescott Tel. & Tel. Co. v. Utils. & Transp. Comm'n, 634 P.2d 897 (Wash. Ct. App. 1981). “It is empowered to make any rules or regulations necessary to carry out its powers and duties.”
Centurylink Comm. Llc, V. Wa Utils. & Transp. Comm'n (Wash. Ct. App. 2025). “2d at 537 - 38, 542 (discussing RCW 80.36.230); see RCW 80.36.300(2), (5) (stating legislative policies to maintain efficient telecommunications service and promote diversity in telecommunications services supply).”
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.