Legal Opinion

Lundberg v. Switzer

Washington Supreme Court

Decided January 24, 1928No. 20730. Department TwoPublishedCited by 24 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Main, J.-

This was a replevin action. The cause came on for trial before the court and a jury. At the conclusion of the evidence, defendants made a motion that the jury be directed to find in favor of the defendants as to their right to the possession of the automobile truck in question; that, if the possession could not be delivered, the jury should then find the value of the automobile and assess the damages. The plaintiffs challenged the sufficiency of the defendants’ testimony and moved for a directed verdict in their favor. The defendants’ motion was denied and the plaintiffs’ motion was…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Walker v. McMurchieWashington Supreme Court · 1911
  2. Union Machinery & Supply Co. v. ThompsonWashington Supreme Court · 1917

3Cited by24 opinions

  1. Fageol Truck & Coach Co. v. Pacific Indemnity Co.California Supreme Court · 1941
  2. Hall v. WorkOregon Supreme Court · 1960
  3. Motor Contract Co. v. Van Der VolgenWashington Supreme Court · 1931
  4. Calhoun v. Universal Credit Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1944
  5. Jones v. GreggSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1956

19 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