Legal Opinion

Dybdahl v. Continental Lumber Co.

Washington Supreme Court

Decided February 19, 1925No. 18791. Department OnePublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBridges, J.

The complaint alleged that the defendant had employed the plaintiff to haul certain logs from the woods in Jefferson county and put them into the waters of Hoods canal, for which service he was to be paid a certain compensation; that, not having been paid, he filed a lien on the logs, which at that time had been transferred to the defendant’s sawmill located in Seattle, in King county. Personal judgment and foreclosure of the lien were sought. The answer is a denial of every allegation in the complaint except that the logs upon which the plaintiff had worked had been conveyed to its mill.…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Cushing v. Monarch Timber Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1913
  2. Coleman v. St. Paul & Tacoma Lumber Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1920
  3. Burns v. Bradford-Kennedy Lumber Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1910
  4. Morris v. BrownWashington Supreme Court · 1912
  5. Davies v. CareyWashington Supreme Court · 1913

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. King v. RivelandWashington Supreme Court · 1994
  2. Sposari v. Matt Malaspina & Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1964
  3. Sweeny v. Sweeny Investment Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1939
  4. Fairview Lumber Co. v. MakosWashington Supreme Court · 1954
  5. R. H. Freitag Manufacturing Co. v. Boeing Airplane Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1959

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API