Legal Opinion

Geranios v. Annex Investments, Inc.

Washington Supreme Court

Decided August 30, 1954No. 32727PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHill, J.

After sifting down and through the various complexities of pleadings, proof, and legal theories, we find here an action to recover five thousand dollars on the theory of unjust enrichment. It was tried to the court without a jury and was dismissed at the conclusion of the plaintiffs’ case because the action, whatever its theory, was barred by the three-year statute of limitations.

We shall, throughout this opinion, refer to the plaintiffs-appellants as Geranios and to the defendant-respondent as Annex.

July 2, 1945, Annex and Geranios entered into a written contract whereby the former agreed to…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Blenz v. FogleWashington Supreme Court · 1923
  2. Young v. City of SeattleWashington Supreme Court · 1948
  3. Washington Security Co. v. StateWashington Supreme Court · 1941
  4. Halver v. WelleWashington Supreme Court · 1954
  5. Croup v. Humboldt Quartz & Placer Mining Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1915

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

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Howarth v. First National Bank of AnchorageAlaska Supreme Court · 1979
  2. Milton E. Dam and Everett S. Dam, Co-Partners Doing Business Under the Firm Name and Style of Dam Brothers v. General Electric Company, a CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1958
  3. Eckert v. Skagit Corp.Court of Appeals of Washington · 1978
  4. Ketner Bros., Inc. v. NicholsWashington Supreme Court · 1958
  5. Dam v. General Electric Co.District Court, E.D. Washington · 1956

7 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