Gaffney v. Megrath

Citations

• 23 Wash. 476
• 63 P. 520
• 1900 Wash. LEXIS 380

Syllabus

<p>GARNISHMENT — PETITION TO QUASH-RIGHT TO JURY TRIAL.</p> <p>Where a writ of garnishment has been issued upon a judgment, the filing of a complaint in intervention by the judgment debtor, which is equivalent to a petition to the court to recall and quash the writ of garnishment, raises a question for the court, and not for a jury, to determine whether sufficient grounds exist for the exercise of such a power.</p> <p>ATTORNEY AND CLIENT-RATIFICATION OF UNAUTHORIZED ACTS-SATISFACTION OF JUDGMENT.</p> <p>Although the action of an attorney in recalling a writ of execution upon a judgment, and in accepting a quantity of brick to be applied in satisfaction thereof, in case judgment on appeal should be sustained against the judgment debtor, may have been in excess of his authority, yet the action of his client, who, with full knowledge of all the facts, subsequently sues him for the value of the brick, amounts to a ratification of his action and constitutes a satisfaction of the judgment to the extent of the value of the brick.</p> <p>INCONSISTENT REMEDIES-ELECTION.</p> <p>The election of a client to sue her attorney to recover from him the value of a quantity of brick he had taken in satisfaction of a judgment obtained for her, in which action she recovered judgment against her attorney, precludes her from pursuing a further remedy by garnishment upon her original judgment.</p>