Legal Opinion

Martinson v. Cruikshank

Washington Supreme Court

Decided April 22, 1940No. 27923PublishedCited by 34 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBlake, C. J.

Plaintiff brought this action for the reformation and specific performance of an agreement, the following terms of which are up for our consideration:

“In Consideration of the sum of Ten and no/100 Dollars, received this day by Robert J. Cruikshank, hereinafter called the seller, from George C. Martin-son, hereinafter called the buyer, said seller hereby agrees to sell to said buyer at any time within 60 days from this date, the following described property situated in the county of Lewis, state of Washington, to-wit:
“160 acres, more or less, in Section 2, Township 13 N, Range 2 East . . .
“If…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Cushing v. Monarch Timber Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1913
  2. Broadway Hospital & Sanitarium v. DeckerWashington Supreme Court · 1907
  3. Gilman v. BruntonWashington Supreme Court · 1916
  4. Thompson v. EnglishWashington Supreme Court · 1913
  5. Marshall v. Hillman Investment Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1929

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

3Cited by34 opinions

  1. Martin v. SeigelWashington Supreme Court · 1949
  2. Key Design Inc. v. MoserWashington Supreme Court · 1999
  3. Key Design, Inc. v. MoserWashington Supreme Court · 1999
  4. Bigelow v. MoodWashington Supreme Court · 1960
  5. Geoghegan v. DeverWashington Supreme Court · 1948

29 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