Legal Opinion

Shoop v. Kittitas County

Court of Appeals of Washington

Decided September 10, 2001No. 47088-4-IPublishedCited by 18 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBecker, J.

The Legislature has recently manifested its intent that RCW 36.01.050 should be construed as a venue statute. Therefore, when a plaintiff commences suit against a county in the superior court of a county not designated in RCW 36.01.050, the suit need not be dismissed for want of subject matter jurisdiction. We reverse the order of dismissal and remand for transfer to a proper county under the change of venue statute.

The statute at issue, RCW 36.01.050, was first adopted in 1963. Until 1997, it provided that an action against a county could be commenced in an adjoining county: “All actions…

2Cases cited30 opinions

  1. Marley v. Department of Labor & IndustriesWashington Supreme Court · 1994
  2. Skagit Surveyors v. FRIENDS OF SKAGITWashington Supreme Court · 1998
  3. Skagit Surveyors & Engineers, LLC v. Friends of Skagit CountyWashington Supreme Court · 1998
  4. State v. MoenWashington Supreme Court · 1996
  5. Covell v. City of SeattleWashington Supreme Court · 1995

25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. Shoop v. Kittitas CountyWashington Supreme Court · 2003
  2. Shoop v. Kittitas CountyWashington Supreme Court · 2003
  3. In re the Marriage of McDermottCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2013
  4. Smale v. NoretepCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2009
  5. Smale v. NoretepCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2009

13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API