Josephinium Associates v. Kahli, 45 P.3d 627 (2002)

Citation: Josephinium Associates v. Kahli, 45 P.3d 627 (2002)
Parent Document: Josephinium Associates v. Kahli, 45 P.3d 627 (2002)
Jurisdiction: Washington (state)
Effective Date: 2002-05-06
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/2638699/josephinium-associates-v-kahli/ ↗

Full Text

1,166 chars

Most jurisdictions permit unlawful discrimination to be asserted as a defense in summary eviction proceedings.[26] Washington cases have not previously confronted this precise question. The only discussion in our cases occurred in Housing Authority of the City of Everett v. Terry.[27] There, the tenant was evicted for breach of a lease covenant because he created a threat to the health and safety of other tenants. Terry claimed the landlord failed to make reasonable accommodation to him as a handicapped person. The Supreme Court vacated the writ of restitution because the landlord had failed to provide the required statutory notice. The court did not consider Terry's discrimination claim, both because it was moot, and because "counterclaims may not be asserted in an unlawful detainer action."[28] As authority for the latter statement, Terry relied on Granat v. Keasler[29] and Woodward v. Blanchett,[30] both of which involved counterclaims not germane to the right of possession. The Terry court undertook no further analysis, and there is no indication the court intended to overrule longstanding case law defining when defenses arise out of a tenancy.

Other Sections in This Document (57)

Full Text