Legal Opinion

Roth v. Drainage Improvement District No. 5

Washington Supreme Court

Decided June 11, 1964No. 36679PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHunter, J.

Plaintiffs (appellants), Simon K. Roth, Simon A. Roth and Mary Ellen Roth, entered into a contract with the defendant (respondent), Drainage Improvement District No. 5, of Clark County, which allowed the defendant to construct a drainage ditch across the plaintiffs’ property. According to the contract the defendant was obligated to construct two cattle crossings, preserve an existing irrigation sump or move it to another location, and construct some fences. The plaintiffs contend that the defendant did not properly perform these obligations under the contract.

This action was brought against…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Abel v. Diking & Drainage Improvement District No. 4Washington Supreme Court · 1943
  2. Linn v. Walla Walla CountyWashington Supreme Court · 1917

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Foothills Development Co. v. Clark County Board of County CommissionersCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1986
  2. Worthington v. WestNETWashington Supreme Court · 2015
  3. Granite Falls Library Capital Facility Area v. Taxpayers of Granite Falls Library Capital Facility AreaWashington Supreme Court · 1998
  4. Reese Sales Co. v. GierCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1977
  5. Pierce County v. Taxpayers of Lakes District Recreation Service AreaWashington Supreme Court · 1967

9 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