Wash. Rev. Code » Title 59 · Chapter 59.18
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 59.18.400 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
On or before the day fixed for his appearance the defendant may appear and answer. The defendant in his answer may assert any legal or equitable defense or set-off arising out of the tenancy. If the complaint alleges that the tenancy should be terminated because the defendant tenant, subtenant, sublessee, or resident engaged in drug-related activity, or allowed any other person to engage in drug-related activity at the rental premises with his or her knowledge or consent, no set-off shall be allowed as a defense to the complaint.
[ 1988 c 150 s 4; 1973 1st ex.s. c 207 s 41.]

Notes:

Legislative findings—Severability—1988 c 150: See notes following RCW 59.18.130.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases, 1980–2015 · leading case: Pham v. Corbett, 351 P.3d 214 (Wash. Ct. App. 2015).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Pham v. Corbett, 351 P.3d 214 (Wash. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 2× “” We reject Pham’s arguments and *827 hold that the Tenants are permitted to raise the defense of breach of warranty of habitability in this action.”
Stephanus v. Anderson, 613 P.2d 533 (Wash. Ct. App. 1980). · cites it 3× “Equitable Defenses Anderson and Bussell next contend that retaliatory eviction is an equitable defense allowed by RCW 59.18.400 even if RCW 59.18.240 does not expressly prohibit the landlord's conduct in this case.”
Lang Pham v. Shawn Corbett (Wash. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 2× “70956-9-1/7 enables a tenant to "assert any legal or equitable defense or set-off arising out of the tenancy.”
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.