Wash. Rev. Code » Title 9 · Chapter 9.01
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 9.01.055 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
Private citizens aiding a police officer, or other officers of the law in the performance of their duties as police officers or officers of the law, shall have the same civil and criminal immunity as such officer, as a result of any act or commission for aiding or attempting to aid a police officer or other officer of the law, when such officer is in imminent danger of loss of life or grave bodily injury or when such officer requests such assistance and when such action was taken under emergency conditions and in good faith.
[ 1969 c 37 s 1.]

Notes:

Immunity from liability for certain types of medical care: RCW 4.24.300.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7 cases, 1996–2008 · leading case: Gardner v. Loomis Armored, Inc., 913 P.2d 377 (Wash. 1996).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Gardner v. Loomis Armored, Inc., 913 P.2d 377 (Wash. 1996). · cites it 3× “RCW 9.01.055. Another statute cited by Plaintiffs makes it a crime to obstruct law enforcement officers from carrying out their duties.”
Gaspar v. Peshastin Hi-Up Growers, 131 Wash. App. 630 (Wash. Ct. App. 2006). · cites it 2× “010 (which states that witnesses and victims of crimes have a civic and moral duty to cooperate fully with law enforcement and prosecutors), RCW 9.01.055 (which gives citizens who aid police the same civil and criminal immunity as the police), RCW 9A.”
Gaspar v. Peshastin Hi-Up Growers, 128 P.3d 627 (Wash. Ct. App. 2006). · cites it 2× “010 (which states that witnesses and victims of crimes have a civic and moral duty to cooperate fully with law enforcement and prosecutors); RCW 9.01.055 (which gives citizens who aid police the same civil and criminal immunity as the police); RCW 9A.”
Danny v. Laidlaw Transit Servs., Inc., 193 P.3d 128 (Wash. 2008). “[1] Gardner's reasoning is particularly germane because it involved a certified question from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Washington regarding a "clear public policy.”
Danny v. Laidlaw Transit Servs., Inc., 165 Wash. 2d 200 (Wash. 2008). “010, RCW 9.01.055, RCW 9A.76.020, .030. There was no specific statutory authority in effect when the actions here took place that Danny can cite for an employment remedy in the domestic violence arena.”
State v. Lee, 917 P.2d 159 (Wash. Ct. App. 1996). “, RCW 9.01.055 (granting citizens criminal and civil immunity when aiding a police officer); RCW 10.”
Gardner v. Loomis Armored Inc., 913 P.2d 377 (Wash. 1996). · cites it 3× “RCW 9.01.055. Another statute cited by Plaintiffs makes it a crime to obstruct law enforcement officers from carrying out their duties.”
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.