Legal Opinion

Cambro Co. v. Snook

Washington Supreme Court

Decided November 5, 1953No. 32358PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDonworth, J.

Plaintiff instituted this action to recover for damage to its buildings resulting from two fires allegedly caused by the negligent operation of an acetylene torch being used by defendants’ employee. The case was tried to the court sitting without a jury. After making certain findings of fact and conclusions of law, the court entered judgment for plaintiff. Defendants have appealed from that judgment.

For convenience, we shall hereafter refer to defendant husband as if he were the only appellant.

The undisputed facts show that the buildings in question adjoined one another at 2516-20 Holgate…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Gardner v. SeymourWashington Supreme Court · 1947
  2. Home Insurance v. Northern Pacific Railway Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1943
  3. Arnold v. SanstolWashington Supreme Court · 1953
  4. World Fire & Marine Insurance v. Alliance Sandblasting Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1927
  5. Nelson v. West Coast Dairy Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1940

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

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Grange v. FinlayWashington Supreme Court · 1961
  2. Mason v. TurnerWashington Supreme Court · 1956
  3. Hufford v. CicovichWashington Supreme Court · 1955
  4. Chaloupka v. CyrWashington Supreme Court · 1963
  5. Doss v. SchullerWashington Supreme Court · 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