Legal Opinion
McRae v. Bolstad
Washington Supreme Court
Decided February 16, 1984No. 49211-5PublishedCited by 52 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtDore, J.
The sellers of real estate appeal the trial court's judgment on a verdict in favor of the plaintiff purchasers, who sought damages for fraudulent misrepresentation and violation of RCW 19.86, the Consumer Protection Act. The Court of Appeals affirmed the judgment and awarded attorney fees on appeal. We now affirm the trial court and Court of Appeals and award additional reasonable attorney fees on appeal.
In November 1977, Nick Mazza of Crescent Realty, Inc., undertook the representation of the Bolstads in the sale of their home. Mazza grew up in the area, and had been involved in the sale of…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- State v. Reader's Digest Ass'nWashington Supreme Court · 1972
- State v. Ralph Williams' North West Chrysler Plymouth, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 1976
- Salois v. Mutual of Omaha InsuranceWashington Supreme Court · 1978
- Anhold v. DanielsWashington Supreme Court · 1980
- Obde v. SchlemeyerWashington Supreme Court · 1960
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by52 opinions
- Hangman Ridge Training Stables, Inc. v. Safeco Title InsuranceWashington Supreme Court · 1986
- Hoffman v. StamperCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2005
- Schmidt v. Cornerstone Investments, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 1990
- INDOOR BILLBOARD WASHINGTON, INC. v. Integra Telecom of Washington, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 2007
- Indoor Billboard/Washington, Inc. v. Integra Telecom of Washington, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 2007
47 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.