Legal Opinion

Clark v. Kraft

Washington Supreme Court

Decided July 21, 1932No. 24007. Department OnePublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHerman, J.

L. H. Kraft and Jane Doe Kraft, Ms wife, and Claude Gf. Bannick, sheriff of King county, Washington, began the foreclosure of a chattel mortgage by notice of sale of mortgaged chattels belonging to Dora H. Clark, a widow. In State ex rel. Clark v. Superior Court, 167 Wash. 481, 10 P. (2d) 233, the court, when discussing a prior phase of the controversy between the parties hereto, used the following-language :

“Prom the record before us, it appears that, on November 7, 1931, relator filed in the superior court a good and sufficient complaint under Bern. Comp: Stat., § 1110, and State ex rel.…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. State Ex Rel. Clark v. Superior CourtWashington Supreme Court · 1932
  2. State ex rel. Southern Alaska Canning Co. v. Superior CourtWashington Supreme Court · 1924
  3. Hanlin v. ParsonsSupreme Court of Iowa · 1871

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Clark v. KraftWashington Supreme Court · 1933
  2. Christensen v. Plymouth Collateral Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1934

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API