Legal Opinion · Concurrence

In re Snyder

Washington Supreme Court

Decided September 26, 1916No. 13384Published

Appeal from a judgment of the superior court for King county, Dykeman, J., entered September 30, 1915, dismissing an application for an allowance under the mothers’ pension act, after a hearing before the court.

1ConcurrenceChadwick, J.

(concurring) — The suggestion that the act of the legislature amending the Mothers’ Pension bill violates art. 1, § 12 of the state constitution, and the fourteenth amendment to the constitution of the United States, will not bear discussion. Those sections of our constitutions apply only to rights sounding in contract, or which become vested rights under some rule of the common law or a statute which partakes of the nature of a contract.

“Vested rights never grow out of gratuitous favor. Only those who can ground their claims in some contract, express or implied, or upon some right guaranteed…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Frisbie v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1895
  2. United States v. HallSupreme Court of the United States · 1879
  3. United States v. TellerSupreme Court of the United States · 1883
  4. Eddy v. MorganIllinois Supreme Court · 1905
  5. McElwain v. AbrahamWashington Supreme Court · 1910

2 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