State ex rel. Fidelity & Deposit Co. v. Superior Court

Citations

• 87 Wash. 498

Syllabus

<p>Courts — Conflicting Jurisdiction — Determination — Notice. Upon prohibition to the superior court of one county to prevent its taking jurisdiction of a case during the pendency of a like action in another county, notice of the pendency of the former action is not a determining factor.</p> <p>Same—Conflicting Jurisdiction — Determination — Complaint. Upon prohibition to the superior court of one county to prevent its taking jurisdiction of a case during the pendency of a like action in another county, the sufficiency of the complaint in the former action is a matter within the jurisdiction of that court to determine, and will therefore not be considered by the supreme court.</p> <p>Same — Conflicting Jurisdiction — Receivers — Appointment. Where an action has been commenced in the superior court of one county for an appointment of a receiver of all the property of an insolvent corporation, in the interest of all the creditors and parties interested, that court acquires jurisdiction of the action and the res without first reducing the property to possession, to the exclusion of the superior court in any other county where a like relief may be sought during the pendency of the first action; hence it is not essential to such exclusive jurisdiction that a receiver be first appointed in that action. .</p> <p>Same. In such a case, it is immaterial to such exclusive jurisdiction that the subsequent action in another county is brought by a creditor who was not a party to the first action; since he can obtain relief in the former action.</p>