Perry v. Beverage
Washington Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtMain, J.
The purpose of this action was to recover damages for personal injuries. The defendants are *654the Webb Logging & Timber Company, a corporation, and James Beverage, its superintendent or foreman. Separate answers were interposed by the defendants. In each there were certain adjnissions and denials, and an affirmative defense which was to the effect that, if the plaintiff sustained injuries, they were due to bis own fault in making an assault upon the defendant Beverage and were inflicted as a matter of self-defense on the part of this defendant. The affirmative defenses were denied by a reply.…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Stertz v. Industrial Insurance CommissionWashington Supreme Court · 1916
- Pace v. Appanoose CountySupreme Court of Iowa · 1918
- First State Bank v. KellyNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1915
- Jenkins v. Carman Mfc. Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1916
- Brown v. City of Walla WallaWashington Supreme Court · 1913
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by40 opinions
- Folsom v. Burger KingWashington Supreme Court · 1998
- Folsom v. Burger KingWashington Supreme Court · 1998
- Vallandigham v. Clover Park School District No. 400Washington Supreme Court · 2005
- Vallandigham v. CLOVER PARK SCHOOL DIST.Washington Supreme Court · 2005
- Birklid v. Boeing Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1995
35 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.