Wash. Rev. Code » Title 81 · Chapter 81.80
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 81.80.280 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(1) Permits may be canceled, suspended, altered, or amended by the commission upon complaint by any interested party, or upon the commission's own motion after notice and opportunity for hearing, when the permittee or permittee's agent has repeatedly violated this chapter, the rules and regulations of the commission, or the motor laws of this state or of the United States, or the household goods carrier has made unlawful rebates or has not conducted its operation in accordance with the permit. The commission may enjoin any person from any violation of this chapter, or any order, rule, or regulation made by the commission pursuant to the terms hereof. If the suit is instituted by the commission, a bond is not required as a condition to the issuance of the injunction.
(2) When the commission has canceled a household goods carrier permit, the carrier must, when directed by the commission, provide notice to every customer that its permit has been canceled, and provide proof of such notice to the commission.
[ 2009 c 94 s 7; 2007 c 234 s 85; 1987 c 209 s 1; 1961 c 14 s 81.80.280. Prior: 1935 c 184 s 24; RRS s 6382-24.]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6 cases, 1953–1967 · leading case: Luisi Truck Lines, Inc. v. Washington Utils. & Transp. Comm'n, 435 P.2d 654 (Wash. 1967).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Luisi Truck Lines, Inc. v. Washington Utils. & Transp. Comm'n, 435 P.2d 654 (Wash. 1967). · cites it 4× “It should be noted initially that the common carrier permit which Luisi acquired in 1939 permitting him to haul fruit and vegetables within certain designated areas constituted a property right and that under the laws of this state, RCW 81.80.280, such property right can be…”
Herrett Trucking Co. v. Washington Pub. Serv. Comm'n, 377 P.2d 871 (Wash. 1963). “Appellant was very lenient with respondent and did not alter its permit to exclude the transportation of general freight until it became satisfied that respondent not only had failed to equip itself so to do, but had no intention to haul freight other than heavy equipment and…”
Lee & Eastes, Inc. v. Pub. Serv. Comm'n, 328 P.2d 700 (Wash. 1958). “■ RCW 81.80.280 2 requires, notice and a hearing before the commission can cancel, suspend, alter or amend any permit; it then authorizes such changes only on the basis of certain violations.”
State ex rel. Arrow Transp. Co. v. Washington Utils. & Transp. Comm'n, 376 P.2d 433 (Wash. 1962). “Chinook contended that its permit authorized the" hauling of any commodity, including liquid petroleum products; that the permit granted by the commission was a property right which could not be cancelled, suspended, altered or amended by the commission, except as provided by…”
Willamette Hauling Co. v. Kuykendall, 263 P.2d 827 (Wash. 1953). · cites it 3× “In its memorandum decision, the court expressed the view that the statute, RCW 81.80.280, authorizing an alteration of a permit in the event the permittee “has not conducted his operations in accordance with the permit granted him,” had reference only to affirmative action…”
St. Ex Rel. Arrow Etc. v. Wn. Utl. Etc., 376 P.2d 433 (Wash. 1962). “Chinook contended that its permit authorized the hauling of any commodity, including liquid petroleum products; that the permit granted by the commission was a property right which could not be cancelled, suspended, altered or amended by the commission, except as provided by RCW…”
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.