Rogers v. Lippy
Washington Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the superior court for King county, Pemberton, J., entered June 10, 1916, upon findings in favor of the plaintiff, in an action on contract, tried to the court.
1DissentMorris, J.
(dissenting)—I am unable to concur in the rule announced in the maj ority opinion, and. inasmuch as this- and the following case of Nance v. Valentine, post p. 323, 169 Pac. 862, have settled adversely to my conception of the law a question upon which the court has sharply divided, I desire as briefly as possible to express my reasons for my dissent.
We are agreed, as stated in the case of Cushing v. Monarch Timber Co., 75 Wash. 678, 135 Pac. 660, Ann. Cas. 1914C 1239, that the contract here involved is enforcible if the-description of the real property is sufficient to meet the requirements…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Hurley v. BrownMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1868
- Mead v. ParkerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1874
- Cushing v. Monarch Timber Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1913
- Guyer v. WarrenIllinois Supreme Court · 1898
- Hodges v. KowingSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1889
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.