Legal Opinion

Dishman v. Whitney

Washington Supreme Court

Decided May 3, 1923No. 16793PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Per curiam

— After the Department opinion in this case was filed, 121 Wash. 157, 209 Pac. 12, a petition for rehearing was presented and granted. Before the time fixed for the rehearing En Banc arrived, the parties- entered into a stipulation reciting that the judgment “has been fully settled and satisfied, and that the appeal may be dismissed without costs to either party.” Notwithstanding the fact that the case, after the petition for rehearing had been granted, did not come on for hearing En Banc, it should be noted that, in the Department opinion, a reference is made to the holding in the case of…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. State v. PsarasWashington Supreme Court · 1922
  2. Buckley v. HarkensWashington Supreme Court · 1921

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Madison v. StateWashington Supreme Court · 2007
  2. Kelsey Lane Homeowners Ass'n v. Kelsey Lane Co., Inc.Court of Appeals of Washington · 2005
  3. Bourus v. HagenWashington Supreme Court · 1937
  4. Snohomish Drug Task Force v. 414 NewbergCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2009
  5. Snohomish Regional Drug Task Force v. Real Property Known as 414 Newberg RoadCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2009

7 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