Stimson Mill Co. v. Feigenson Engineering Co.
Washington Supreme Court
Appeals from a judgment of the superior court for King county, Mackintosh, J., entered June 26, 1917, upon findings in favor of the plaintiff, in an action to foreclose mechanics’ liens, after a trial to the court.
1Opinion of the CourtChadwick, J.
The C. D. Stimson Company, a corporation, hereinafter referred to as the owner, leased to the Natatorium Company, a corporation, to be referred to as the lessee, certain property in the city of Seattle. It agreed to construct a building for the lessee to be used by it as a natatorium. An architect was employed to draw plans and specifications. He entered into a contract with the lessee. The contract was vised on its face “Accepted by C. D. Stimson Co., Per. Thomas D. Stimson.” General plans and specifications were prepared, and a contract let to Hans Pederson to construct the building…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Chicago Lumber Co. v. DouglasSupreme Court of Kansas · 1913
- Brace & Hergert Mill Co. v. BurbankWashington Supreme Court · 1915
- Avery & Sons v. Woodruff & CahillCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1911
- Wheeler, Osgood & Co. v. Everett Land Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1896
- E. R. Darlington Lumber Co. v. Westlake Construction Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1911
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Caird Engineering Works v. Seven-Up Gold Mining Co., Inc.Montana Supreme Court · 1940
- Fidelity & Deposit Co. v. Mattingly Lumber Co.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1939
- Caird Engineering Works v. Seven-Up Gold Mining Co., Inc.Montana Supreme Court · 1940
- Lindbrook Construction, Inc. v. Mukilteo School District No. 6Washington Supreme Court · 1969
- Lindbrook Construction, Inc. v. Mukilteo School District No. 6Washington Supreme Court · 1969
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.