State ex rel. Alaska Pacific Navigation Co. v. Superior Court

Citations

• 113 Wash. 439
• 194 P. 412
• 1920 Wash. LEXIS 864

Syllabus

<p>Set-Off and Counterclaim (16) — Against Assigned Claims. In an action by an assignee for tbe purposes of collection, Rem. Code, §§ 267, 271% and 272, permit a set-off against the assignor to the extent of the claim only.</p> <p>Parties (42) — Bringing in New Parties — Necessity and Grounds — Action Upon Assigned Claims. Under Rem. Code, § 273, authorizing a defendant to set forth as many defenses and counterclaims as he may have, either legal or equitable, and Id., § 196, authorizing the court to bring in new parties when necessary to a complete determination of the action, in an action by an assignee for collection, a defendant setting up a legal counterclaim is not entitled to have the assignor of the claim brought in as a party plaintiff, in view of the fact that Id., §§ 267, 271% and 272, limit the counterclaim to the extent of the claim, and it is only in the case of equitable defenses that the presence of the assignor may be necessary to a complete determination of the action.</p> <p>Action (25) — Judgment (213-2) — Splitting Cause — Counterclaim in Action on Assigned Claim. Since the defendant in an action by an assignee for collection is restricted in his counterclaim against the assignor, he may plead the same as a defense and maintain a separate action for the balance of his claim, without being subject to the rule against the splitting of his claim.</p>