Legal Opinion

Nielson v. Crossett

Washington Supreme Court

Decided April 18, 1940No. 27835PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSimpson, J.

This is an action in which plaintiff sought to recover judgment against defendants for the balance due, interest, and attorneys’ fees, upon a promissory note executed by defendant E. C. Adams.

The complaint alleges that, prior to January 18, 1936, plaintiff loaned to Roy Wilkinson the sum of $750 for the purpose of enabling Wilkinson to open a garage and service station at Reardan, Washington; that, pursuant to this plan, Wilkinson conceived the enterprise known as Reardan Motor Company; that, thereafter, defendant Adams purchased the garage business from Wilkinson and, as part of the purchase…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Fisch v. MarlerWashington Supreme Court · 1939
  2. Union Machinery & Supply Co. v. DarnellWashington Supreme Court · 1916
  3. In Re Corneliusen's EstateWashington Supreme Court · 1935
  4. Hart v. BogleWashington Supreme Court · 1915
  5. First National Bank & Trust Co. v. United States Trust Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1935

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Kietz v. Gold Point Mines, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 1940
  2. Plains State Bank v. EllisSupreme Court of Kansas · 1953
  3. Mutual Security Financing v. UniteCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1993

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

Powered by the Exa API