Legal Opinion

Rehm v. Reilly

Washington Supreme Court

Decided March 24, 1931No. 22885. Department TwoPublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtTolman, C. J.

This is an action to quiet title. Only a part of the property described in the complaint is involved in this appeal.

It is alleged that Melvina Cannon, an incompetent person, is the owner of a life estate in the property described, and that the respondent Hope Grant Rehm is the owner in fee simple of the remainder.

Defendant Fisher and wife answered by appropriate denials and by cross-complaint, alleging that they were the owners in fee simple of that portion of the property now in dispute, and demand judgment establishing their title and awarding them damages for interference with their use…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Townsend v. LittleSupreme Court of the United States · 1883
  2. Hawkes v. HoffmanWashington Supreme Court · 1909
  3. Sanguinetti v. RossenCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1906
  4. Red River Valley Land & Investment Co. v. SmithNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1898
  5. Sheldon v. PowellMontana Supreme Court · 1904

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Hendricks v. LakeCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1974
  2. Bremerton Creamery & Produce Co. v. ElliottWashington Supreme Court · 1935
  3. Woodbury v. Connecticut Mutual Life InsuranceSupreme Court of Missouri · 1942
  4. Wiswall v. Tanner (In Re Tanner)United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Washington · 1992
  5. Bersos v. Cape George Colony ClubCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1974

5 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