Legal Opinion

Hahn v. Brickell

Washington Supreme Court

Decided October 8, 1926No. 19866. Department TwoPublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMain, J.

— When this case was here upon the former appeal, 135 Wash. 189, 237 Pac. 305, the judgment was reversed and the cause remanded for a new trial because of error in the admission of testimony.

Upon the second trial, at the conclusion of the evidence, the defendants challenged the sufficiency thereof and moved for a directed verdict, which motion was denied and the cause submitted to the jury. A verdict was returned in favor of the plaintiff and, after a motion for new trial had been made and overruled, judgment was entered upon the verdict, from which the defendants appeal. The preliminary…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. State v. GayWashington Supreme Court · 1914
  2. State v. BeemanWashington Supreme Court · 1909
  3. Hahn v. BrickellWashington Supreme Court · 1925
  4. Fillmore v. Union Pacific RailroadWyoming Supreme Court · 1879
  5. Lindquist v. Pacific Coast Coal Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1914

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Moen v. ChestnutWashington Supreme Court · 1941
  2. Lindberg v. SteeleWashington Supreme Court · 1940
  3. Lambert v. SmithWashington Supreme Court · 1959
  4. Martin v. Foss Launch & Tug Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1962
  5. Weinman v. Puget Sound Power & Light Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1933

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

Powered by the Exa API