The Washington Court of Appeals has reversed a trial court's decision to transfer the venue of a case involving Wade and Teresa King, who operate King Ranch, to Thurston County. The decision, filed on October 22, 2026, affects the Kings, who are cattle ranchers, and the Washington State Department of Natural Resources (DNR), which manages state trust lands. The ruling is significant as it will allow the Kings to pursue their claims in Douglas County, where they initially filed their complaint.

The Kings’ dispute with DNR centers around allegations of wetland violations and the subsequent termination of their leases. The court's ruling clarifies the legal framework surrounding the administrative procedure claims made by the Kings against the DNR.

Background

Wade and Teresa King are a husband-and-wife team who have run King Ranch for generations in eastern Washington. They raise and breed livestock on both private and public lands in Grant and Douglas Counties. The conflict began when the Washington State Department of Ecology conducted an investigation into alleged violations of wetland laws by the Kings. The Kings described the investigation as flawed and claimed it was based on insufficient evidence.

Initially, DNR appeared sympathetic to the Kings' situation. However, after a meeting with the Department of Ecology, DNR ordered the Kings to admit to damaging state-owned land and to agree to cooperate with restoration efforts. The Kings refused, leading to DNR terminating their Grant County lease and deciding not to renew their Douglas County lease. This decision has potential implications for their ranching operations, which they argue could cause irreparable harm.

The Kings filed a petition and complaint for judicial review in Douglas County Superior Court, seeking relief under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) and other applicable laws. Their claims included allegations that DNR violated its statutory duties and failed to adhere to proper rulemaking procedures when entering into a memorandum of agreement with Ecology.

The Ruling

The trial court initially agreed with DNR that the Kings' claims regarding DNR’s duties were not valid under the APA. The court concluded that the Kings' claims should be transferred to Thurston County based on a supposed stipulation made during oral arguments that did not actually exist. The Kings contested this transfer, arguing that their claims were properly filed in Douglas County.

The Washington Court of Appeals, led by Judge Lawrence-Berrey, ruled that the trial court erred by transferring the entire case to Thurston County. The court noted that the transfer was based on a misunderstanding regarding a stipulation that was never made. The ruling stated, "Discretionary transfer decisions should be made by a trial court, not an appellate court." This indicates that the Kings' claims should be evaluated on their merits in Douglas County.

The court emphasized that the viability of the Kings' claims under the APA needed to be determined before any venue transfer could be justified. The ruling also clarified that if the Kings' claims are valid, they can be heard in Douglas County, but if not, the case may need to be transferred to Thurston County.

Impact

The court's decision to reverse the venue transfer has significant implications for the Kings and their ranching operations. By allowing their claims to be heard in Douglas County, the Kings will have the opportunity to argue their case without the complications of navigating a venue change. This ruling also underscores the importance of proper legal procedures and the need for clarity in administrative actions taken by state agencies.

This case may set a precedent regarding how administrative claims are handled in Washington, particularly concerning the interpretation of the APA. The court's analysis of what constitutes “agency action” under the APA will likely influence future cases involving similar disputes between landowners and state agencies.

What's Next

The Kings can now proceed with their claims in Douglas County. The court has remanded the case back to the trial court to determine the viability of the Kings' duty claims. If those claims are found to be valid, the Kings' rulemaking claim can also be heard in Douglas County. If not, further proceedings may lead to a transfer to Thurston County. Details regarding any potential appeals or related cases were not available in the court filing.