Legal Opinion

Cerkonek v. Dibble

Washington Supreme Court

Decided April 15, 1953No. 32311PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHill, J.

This is an action against the estate of Carl E. Tideman, deceased, on the theory that, by reason of a fraudulent misrepresentation by Mr. Tideman in his lifetime, his estate has been unjustly enriched. The alleged fraudulent misrepresentation was that there were sixty acres under irrigation on a 385-acre ranch which Albin P. Cerkonek and Anna Cerkonek, husband and wife, and their son, John E. Cerkonek, who are the plaintiffs in this action, acquired from Tideman in a trade-sale transaction. Plaintiffs allege that only twenty-nine acres were under irrigation.

The Cerkoneks and Tideman‘signed an…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Salter v. HeiserWashington Supreme Court · 1951
  2. Ramsey v. MadingWashington Supreme Court · 1950
  3. State ex rel. Baeder v. BlakeWashington Supreme Court · 1919
  4. Kilbourne v. KilbourneWashington Supreme Court · 1930
  5. Jones v. MatsonWashington Supreme Court · 1940

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Puget Sound National Bank v. St. Paul Fire & Marine InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1982
  2. Rogich v. DresselWashington Supreme Court · 1954
  3. Corbett v. TicktinWashington Supreme Court · 1953

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API