Legal Opinion

Dickson v. Hausman

Washington Supreme Court

Decided April 14, 1966No. 37839PublishedCited by 19 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Langenbach, J. †

Dickson commenced this action to enforce a contract requiring Hausman to purchase Dickson’s shares of stock in their business upon the latter’s claimed retirement. The court entered judgment for respondent, finding that Dickson did not retire within the terms of the contract. Dickson has appealed. (Their wives are nominal parties.)

Respondent owned and conducted a customs brokerage business in Seattle for years. He sought a younger man in a proprietary capacity, as an eventual partner or successor in his business. In 1955, appellant was 28 years of age and respondent was 58…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Bignold v. King CountyWashington Supreme Court · 1965
  2. Boeing Airplane Co. v. Firemen's Fund Indemnity Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1954
  3. In Re Garrity's EstateWashington Supreme Court · 1945
  4. Ball v. Stokely Foods, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 1950
  5. Burch v. RiceWashington Supreme Court · 1950

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

3Cited by19 opinions

  1. Stender v. Twin City Foods, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 1973
  2. Dickson v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1970
  3. Patti v. Western MacHine Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1976
  4. Lynch v. HigleyCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1973
  5. Schauerman v. HaagWashington Supreme Court · 1966

14 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