Disputes over trusts and estates can be emotionally charged, legally complex, and financially draining. In Washington State, the Trust and Estate Dispute Resolution Act (TEDRA), codified at RCW 11.96A, provides a flexible framework for resolving these conflicts efficiently—often without the need for full-scale litigation. Whether you are a fiduciary, beneficiary, or legal practitioner, understanding how TEDRA works can make a critical difference in navigating estate-related conflicts.
This article offers a practical overview of TEDRA’s purpose, scope, procedures, and dispute-resolution tools, with a focus on how it operates in real-world scenarios.
What Is TEDRA and Why Does It Matter?
Enacted in 1999, TEDRA is a procedural statute designed to facilitate the resolution of disputes involving trusts, estates, and other matters governed by Title 11 of the Revised Code of Washington. Rather than creating new legal claims, TEDRA provides mechanisms—both judicial and nonjudicial—for presenting and resolving existing claims.
At its core, TEDRA promotes efficiency, flexibility, and cost-effectiveness by empowering courts and parties to resolve disputes promptly and tailor procedures to the needs of a given case.
Compared to traditional litigation, it offers faster resolution, lower costs, flexible procedures, multiple dispute-resolution pathways, and opportunities to maintain privacy—advantages that can be invaluable for families navigating sensitive trust and estate matters.
When Does TEDRA Apply?
In most trust and estate disputes, TEDRA will apply. Its reach is broad, covering issues, including:
- Will contests and disputes over the validity of revocable trusts
- Determining beneficiary status
- Characterizing property as community or separate
- Trustee or personal representative disputes
- Claims for breach of fiduciary duty
- Trust modifications or reformations
There are limited exceptions, such as wrongful death actions or matters governed by specific guardianship statutes, but in practice, TEDRA is the default procedural framework for most estate-related conflicts. It supplements, rather than supersedes, other applicable statutes.
Because TEDRA’s scope is so broad, disputes that initially appear narrow can quickly expand to encompass issues involving fiduciary conduct, accountings, beneficiary rights, attorney fees, or the interpretation of trust and estate documents. Identifying the full range of potential issues early in a dispute can be critical to developing an effective strategy.
Starting a TEDRA Action
A TEDRA proceeding begins by filing a petition as a new action. In some cases, it can later be consolidated with an existing matter for efficiency. Unlike standard civil litigation, TEDRA is considered a “special proceeding,” meaning its statutory procedures take priority over conflicting civil rules.
One of the most critical steps in a TEDRA action is identifying and notifying all interested parties. Under TEDRA, a “party” includes anyone with an interest in the subject matter of the dispute, including:
- Beneficiaries
- Fiduciaries (trustees, personal representatives)
- Guardians or legal representatives
- The Attorney General (in charitable trust matters)
TEDRA also incorporates the concept of “virtual representation,” allowing one party (such as a trustee or guardian) to represent and bind others, provided there is no conflict of interest.
A summons and petition must be served on all interested parties—not just adversaries. Proper notice is crucial, as failure to comply can jeopardize the case, particularly in time-sensitive matters like will contests.
Lastly, Will contests, which are one form of a TEDRA action, are subject to a second set of strict, statutory deadlines governing filing and service of the petition. Missing these deadlines can permanently bar a claim, regardless of the claim’s merits. For a detailed discussion of Washington’s will contest deadlines and service requirements set forth in RCW 11.24.010, see our article, “What Is the Deadline to Contest a Will in Washington? A Guide to Timing and Service.”
The Initial Hearing: Efficiency in Action
One of TEDRA’s defining features is its emphasis on efficiency. The initial hearing can be a “hearing on the merits,” meaning the court may resolve all legal and factual issues at that stage. However, more often than not, the court will continue the matter under supervision of the court, set discovery, and/or assign the matter to a trial judge, depending on the complexity of the dispute.
Testimony can be presented by affidavit at the initial hearing, and the court has wide discretion to:
- Issue temporary or final rulings
- Set discovery parameters
- Schedule further proceedings if needed
This streamlined process can significantly reduce time and costs compared to traditional litigation.
Although TEDRA permits resolution at the first hearing, whether the court will rule on the merits often depends on the nature of the dispute and the quality of the available evidence. Cases involving contested facts frequently require additional discovery before final resolution.
Discovery and Trial Under TEDRA
Although TEDRA emphasizes efficiency, it still accommodates traditional litigation tools when necessary. Discovery is not automatic but is available when a formal judicial proceeding has been initiated and/or when the court finds “good cause.” When permitted, discovery follows standard civil rules but may be (and sometimes is) limited to ensure efficiency.
Trial
If the dispute is not resolved at the initial hearing or through summary judgment, it may proceed to trial. Courts often employ abbreviated pre-trial schedules to maintain momentum.
In practice, relatively few TEDRTA matters reach full trial. The combination of early court involvement, mediation requirements, and the possibility of attorney fees awards often creates strong incentives for parties to evaluate settlement opportunities before trial.
Alternative Dispute Resolution: Mediation and Arbitration
TEDRA strongly encourages resolving disputes outside the courtroom.
Mediation can be initiated voluntarily or by notice. Unless a party demonstrates “good cause” to avoid it, mediation will typically be ordered to proceed. Mediation allows for flexible scheduling, and includes the selection of a qualified mediator, minimum participation requirements (generally at least three hours), and equal sharing of costs unless otherwise ordered. If successful, mediation should result in a binding agreement, discussed more below.
Arbitration is a more formal alternative, typically used after mediation fails or is deemed unnecessary. Arbitration applies only if the mediation concluded or was waived, or the court determines mediation is unnecessary and orders arbitration. In arbitration, a qualified arbitrator is selected to oversee the process. Standard rules of evidence are applied, unless the parties agree to modify them, and written decisions are issued within a specified timeframe. Parties also retain the right to appeal and obtain a de novo review. Overall, arbitration provides a structured, yet efficient path to resolution.
Nonjudicial Settlement Agreements
Nonjudicial settlement agreements are one of TEDRA’s most powerful tools, allowing disputes to be resolved entirely outside of court through binding agreements. Nearly any issue that could be litigated under TEDRA can be addressed in this way, including trust modifications, early termination of trusts, changes in fiduciaries, and property classification.
To be binding, the agreement must be in writing and signed by all interested parties or their authorized representatives. These agreements may be filed with the court, giving them the same effect as a final court order, or they may be kept private to maintain confidentiality. A party may also choose to file a memorandum summarizing the agreement so that not all terms become part of the public court record.
Special Representatives and Virtual Representation
TEDRA introduces flexible mechanisms to ensure all interests are represented, even when parties are unavailable or unknown. A “special representative” can be appointed to act, so long as no conflict of interest exists between the representative and those represented, for minors, incapacitated individuals, or unborn or unidentified beneficiaries.
Unlike a guardian ad litem, a special representative may be nominated by the parties, which can streamline the process.
Attorney Fees Under TEDRA
RCW 11.96A.150 gives courts broad discretion to award attorney fees and costs based on what the court determines to be equitable. Fees may be awarded to or against an individual party, the estate or trust, or from nonprobate assets.
Importantly, courts are no longer limited to awarding fees only when the litigation benefits the estate as a whole, and may now consider all equitable factors, rather than focusing solely on whether the litigation benefited the estate as a whole. This flexibility reflects TEDRA’s overarching goal: fairness and efficiency.
TEDRA’s attorney fee provisions are frequently among the most consequential aspects of a TEDRA dispute. For both petitioners and respondents, the possibility and risks of a fee award can significantly influence litigation strategy, settlement discussions, and overall case value.
Final Thoughts
Trust and estate disputes are often unavoidable, but they do not have to escalate into prolonged and expensive litigation. TEDRA provides a robust framework that emphasizes collaboration, efficiency, and practical solutions.
For attorneys, understanding TEDRA is essential to effective advocacy. For clients, it offers reassurance that there are structured, fair, and flexible ways to resolve even the most complex inheritance disputes.
By leveraging tools like mediation, arbitration, and nonjudicial agreements, parties can often reach outcomes that preserve relationships and protect assets—achieving resolutions that litigation alone might not deliver.
If you are facing a trust or estate dispute, the Stokes Lawrence Trust & Estate Litigation Team can help you navigate your options and develop a strategy tailored to your goals. Our attorneys regularly advise fiduciaries, beneficiaries, trustees, personal representatives, and other interested parties in TEDRA proceedings throughout Washington. We work with clients to evaluate both litigation and settlement strategies and to identify solutions that align with their legal and practical objectives. Contact us today to discuss how we can assist you in achieving an efficient and effective resolution.
