Legal Opinion
State ex rel. Rohde v. Sachs
Washington Supreme Court
Decided May 21, 1891No. 221PublishedCited by 9 opinions
Original Application for Mandamus. The facts are sufficiently stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Hoyt, J.
— By his demurrer to the alternative writ issued herein, the respondent admits the entry of an order, as follows:
“On this 28th day of March, A. 3>. 1891, in open court, while the Hon. Morris B. Sachs, a judge of the superior court of the State of Washington, was engaged as such judge in deciding a motion pending in the case of Nickels-burg v. Stencil et al., then pending in the superior court of Jefferson county, Wash., over which the said Morris B. Sachs was then presiding as judge thereof, one William J. *374Rohde, an attorney of record of said…
2Cited by9 opinions
- Paul v. StanleyWashington Supreme Court · 1932
- Sloan v. MitchellWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1933
- In re WaughWashington Supreme Court · 1903
- In re DunnNebraska Supreme Court · 1909
- State ex rel. Martin v. PendergastWashington Supreme Court · 1905
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.