Legal Opinion

Bently v. Port Townsend Hotel & Improvement Co.

Washington Supreme Court

Decided March 18, 1893No. 718PublishedCited by 1 opinion

Appeal from Superior Gourt, Jefferson County.

1Per curiam

Motion is made in this case to dismiss the appeal, and to strike the pretended statement of facts from the record for the reason that it was not filed or settled in time; that it was not certified as required by law; that it does not contain the evidence given on the trial, and that notice of its settlement was not sufficient nor in time to give the court jurisdiction to settle it.

This case falls within the rule laid down by this court in Stenger v. Roeder, 3 Wash. 412 (28 Pac. Rep. 748); also Enos v. Wilcox, 3 *297Wash. 44 (28 Pac. Rep. 364); Snyder v. Kelso, 3 Wash. 181 (28 Pac. Rep. 335).

The…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Enos v. WilcoxWashington Supreme Court · 1891
  2. Stenger v. RoederWashington Supreme Court · 1892
  3. Snyder v. KelsoWashington Supreme Court · 1891

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Littell v. SaulsberryWashington Supreme Court · 1905

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

Powered by the Exa API