Code of Alabama
Ala. Code § 6-8-84 (2026)
Effect of Statute of Limitations.
✓ official Alabama Legislature (ALISON) text, current July 2026
When the defendant pleads a counterclaim to the plaintiff’s demand, to which the plaintiff replies the statute of limitations, the defendant is nevertheless entitled to his counterclaim, where it was a legal subsisting claim at the time the right of action accrued to the plaintiff on the claim in the action.
(Code 1867, §2647; Code 1876, §2996; Code 1886, §2682; Code 1896, §3732; Code 1907, §5863; Code 1923, §10177; Code 1940, T. 7, §355.)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 13
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1979–2023 · leading case: ROMAR DEV. v. Gulf View Mgmt. Corp., 644 So. 2d 462 (Ala. 1994).
ROMAR DEV. v. Gulf View Mgmt. Corp., 644 So. 2d 462 (Ala. 1994). “(2) Because of the preceding rule, Ala. Code 1975, § 6-8-84, and Ala.R.Civ.P.”
Univalor Trust, SA v. Columbia Petroleum, LLC, 315 F.R.D. 374 (S.D. Ala. 2016). “2d [at] 473 (Ala. Code 1975, § 6-8-84 applies only to permissive counterclaims).”
Exxon Corp. v. Dep't of Conservation & Nat. Res., 859 So. 2d 1096 (Ala. 2003). “Exxon answers this argument by citing Ala.Code 1975, § 6-8-84, which provides: "When the defendant pleads a counterclaim to the plaintiff's demand, to which the plaintiff replies the statute of limitations, the defendant is nevertheless entitled to his counterclaim, where it was…”
Northstar Anesthesia of Alabama, LLC v. Noble, 215 So. 3d 1044 (Ala. 2016). ““In its Rule 5(a) certification, the trial court identified what, in its opinion, is the ‘controlling question of law* in this case: ‘Specifically, the issue presented is whether the claims asserted in the counterclaim relate back as to [the counterclaim defendants] under Ala.”
Sharp Elec. Corp. v. Shaw, 524 So. 2d 586 (Ala. 1987). “This statute is currently codified as Code 1975, § 6-8-84, and it provides: When the defendant pleads a counterclaim to the plaintiff's demand, to which the plaintiff replies the statute of limitations, the defendant is nevertheless entitled to his counterclaim, where it was a…”
Ex Parte Fletcher, 429 So. 2d 1041 (Ala. 1982). “The defendant argues this is so because a TILA counterclaim is in the nature of a recoupment rather than a setoff and thus is not subject to the statute of limitations which applies to setoffs under Code of Ala.1975, § 6-8-84. "This court is not unfamiliar with the issue.”
Murray v. Mansheim, 2010 SD 18 (S.D. 2010). “"); Colo.Rev.Stat. XX-XX-XXX (extending limitations period for compulsory counterclaims one year after the service of the complaint of opposing party); Conn.”
Fletcher v. Pub. Fin. Co. of Alabama, 429 So. 2d 1039 (Ala. Civ. App. 1981). “and § 6-8-84, Code (1975). The issue arises under the following pertinent facts: Willie D.”
Alabama Bancorporation v. Henley, 465 F. Supp. 648 (N.D. Ala. 1979). “Ala.Code § 6-8-84 (1975). 27 . See Luckenback Steamship Co.”
Snow v. Baldwin, 491 So. 2d 900 (Ala. 1986). “Under Code 1975, § 6-8-84, in order for a counterclaim to withstand a challenge that it is barred by the statute of limitations, the counterclaim must have been “a legal subsisting claim at the time the right of action accrued to the plaintiff on the claim in the action.”
Vincent v. F. Hood Craddock Mem'l Clinic, 482 So. 2d 270 (Ala. 1985). “The Vincents raise the following issue on appeal: Does the four-year limitation of the Alabama Medical Liability Act, Code 1975, § 6-5-482, bar a compulsory counterclaim for wrongful death brought outside the four-year limit, thereby preventing the same from relating back…”
Silvaris Corp. v. Craig (S.D. Ala. 2023). “1994) (“Ala. Code, § 6-8-84 . . . appl[ies] only to permissive counterclaims.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.