Legal Opinion

Bartelt v. Seehorn

Washington Supreme Court

Decided May 31, 1901No. 3622PublishedCited by 8 opinions

Appeal from Superior Court, Spokane County.- — Hon. William E. Richardson, Judge.

1Opinion of the Court

.The opinion of the court was delivered by

Fullerton, J.

Tbe appellant brought this action to recover damages for the loss of a horse, alleged to have been caused by the negligence of the respondent. The respondent answered the complaint by a general denial, and by pleading affirmatively three separate defenses, one of which was as follows:

“1. That on the 30th day of November, 1898, at Spokane, in an action then pending in the above-entitled court between the above-named plaintiff and the above-named defendant, and for the same cause of action as that set forth in the complaint herein, the…

2Cited by8 opinions

  1. Swak v. Department of Labor & IndustriesWashington Supreme Court · 1952
  2. Nance v. ValentineWashington Supreme Court · 1918
  3. Lownsdale v. Grays Harbor Boom Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1909
  4. Carroll v. Grande Ronde Electric Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1907
  5. Plumley v. SimpsonWashington Supreme Court · 1903

3 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