Wash. Rev. Code » Title 86 · Chapter 86.16
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 86.16.120 (2025)

Flood damages defined

✓ laws through the 2025 session: 2026 session laws are not yet included
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
Damages within the meaning of this chapter shall include harmful inundation, water erosion of soil, stream banks and beds, stream channel shifting and changes, harmful deposition by water of eroded and shifting soils and debris upon property or in the beds of streams or other bodies of water, damages by high water to public roads, highways, bridges, utilities and to works built for protection against floods or inundation, the interruption by floods of travel, communication and commerce, and all other high water influences and results which injuriously affect the public health and the safety of property.
[ 1935 c 159 s 2; RRS s 9663A-2.]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases, 1977–2008 · leading case: Maple Leaf Investors, Inc. v. Dep't of Ecology, 565 P.2d 1162 (Wash. 1977).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Maple Leaf Investors, Inc. v. Dep't of Ecology, 565 P.2d 1162 (Wash. 1977). “) The legislature gave "flood damage" a broad definition (RCW 86.16.120), and instructed that the provisions of the chapter "shall be liberally construed with a view to effect their object.”
Fitzpatrick v. Okanogan Cnty., 143 Wash. App. 288 (Wash. Ct. App. 2008). “RCW 86.16.120. ¶30 The landowners correctly note that the immunity does not extend to an unconstitutional taking.”
Fitzpatrick v. Okanogan Cnty., 177 P.3d 716 (Wash. Ct. App. 2008). “RCW 86.16.120. ¶ 30 The landowners correctly note that the immunity does not extend to an unconstitutional taking.”
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.