Legal Opinion

McElroy v. Williams

Washington Supreme Court

Decided June 5, 1896No. 2061PublishedCited by 6 opinions

Appeal from Superior Court, King County. — Hon. T. J. Humes, Judge.

1Opinion of the Court

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Scott, J.

This was an action upon a bond given by the defendant Williams as principal and the defendants Miller and Stinson as sureties, to Frank W. Clancy and Thomas H. Clancy. Thereafter, one of the obligees in said bond assigned all of his right and interest therein to the plaintiff McElroy, and the other obligee assigned all his right and interest therein to the plaintiff, Thomas Clancy, 15y separate instruments. Judgment being rendered for the plaintiffs, the defendants have appealed. Two grounds of error are alleged.

The first is that the obligees…

2Cited by6 opinions

  1. Graves v. BonnessSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1906
  2. Thex v. ShreveWyoming Supreme Court · 1928
  3. Palmer v. Oregon-Washington R. & Nav. Co.District Court, W.D. Washington · 1913
  4. Falero v. FaleroSupreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1909
  5. Manzanares v. Porto Rico Racing Corp.Supreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1933

1 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