Washington

Find an Attorney in Washington

Washington pairs pure comparative fault with one of the country’s only state-monopoly workers’ comp systems (L&I), a 3-year PI SOL, and a Consumer Protection Act that allows treble damages and attorney fees. From King County to eastern Washington, court culture varies — but the underlying doctrine is plaintiff-friendlier than most states.

Practice areas in Washington

Common questions about Washington attorneys

Three years from the date of injury under RCW § 4.16.080 for most negligence claims — longer than most states. Claims against the state or local government require pre-suit notice and have a 60-day claim-filing period under RCW § 4.96.020. Medical malpractice has its own 3-year SOL with discovery-rule extensions and an 8-year statute of repose under RCW § 4.16.350.
Under RCW § 4.22.005, Washington uses pure comparative fault. Even if you’re 99% at fault, you can still recover 1% of your damages — Washington is one of only 13 states allowing this. In most other states (Oregon, Idaho, Montana), being more than 50%–51% at fault bars recovery. The jury assigns percentages, and your award is reduced accordingly.
Washington is one of only four states where workers’ comp is exclusively provided by a state agency — the Department of Labor & Industries (L&I) under RCW § 51. Private employers can’t buy traditional workers’ comp from a private carrier; they pay premiums to L&I or qualify as self-insured under L&I oversight. Claims are decided by L&I, with appeals to the Board of Industrial Insurance Appeals (BIIA). Ohio, Wyoming, and North Dakota have similar systems.
The CPA (RCW § 19.86) allows consumers to recover actual damages plus treble damages up to $25,000 and reasonable attorney fees for unfair or deceptive acts in trade or commerce. Plaintiffs must show an unfair or deceptive act, a public interest impact, and injury to business or property. It’s a workhorse statute for consumer-facing claims and is broader than many state UDAP statutes — particularly the public-interest element which Washington courts have interpreted generously.
No — the Washington Supreme Court struck down non-economic damages caps in Sofie v. Fibreboard (1989) and the medical-malpractice cap in Schreiner v. Fruit (1986) under the state constitution’s right-to-jury-trial clause. That makes Washington one of the more plaintiff-friendly med-mal states. RCW § 7.70 governs the cause of action, and a Certificate of Merit is required for certain claims under RCW § 7.70.150.

Ready to find your attorney?

Tell us what happened — we’ll match you with a Washington attorney who can evaluate your case.

Find my attorney

DearLegal is a legal referral service, not a law firm. We connect individuals with licensed attorneys who can evaluate their case. Nothing on this page constitutes legal advice. Results vary based on individual circumstances.