Legal Opinion

Eakle v. Hayes

Washington Supreme Court

Decided March 31, 1936No. 25617. En BancPublishedCited by 35 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSteinert, J.

This appeal presents a garnishment proceeding, based on a judgment previously obtained by plaintiff in the action against the principal defendants, for damages to plaintiff’s automobile. On the issues framed in the garnishment proceeding, a hearing was had, pursuant to which the court made findings of fact from which it was concluded that plaintiff was not entitled to recover from the garnishee defendant. From a judgment dismissing the writ of garnishment, plaintiff appealed.

The facts material to the controversy are these: On February 5, 1932, appellant’s automobile collided with an…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Hynding v. Home Accident InsuranceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1932
  2. Allegretto v. Oregon Automobile InsuranceOregon Supreme Court · 1932
  3. Reynolds v. Travelers Insurance Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1934
  4. Metropolitan Casualty Ins. Co. v. BlueSupreme Court of Alabama · 1929
  5. Basta v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1928

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

3Cited by35 opinions

  1. Oregon Automobile Insurance v. SalzbergWashington Supreme Court · 1975
  2. Salonen v. PaanenenMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1947
  3. Associated Indemnity Corp. v. WachsmithWashington Supreme Court · 1940
  4. Van Dyke v. WhiteWashington Supreme Court · 1960
  5. Holthe v. IskowitzWashington Supreme Court · 1948

30 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