Legal Opinion

Himpel v. Lindgren

Washington Supreme Court

Decided October 6, 1930No. 22584. Department OnePublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtParker, J.

— The plaintiff, Mrs. Himpel, commenced this unlawful detainer action in the superior court for Clark county, seeking recovery of possession of her dairy farm in that county from the defendant, Lindgren. He had gone into possession of the farm under a lease contract with her. Her claimed right to be restored to possession is rested upon the theory that the tenancy was, in legal effect, only orally created, and was only from year to year, and that she lawfully terminated it by appropriate notice to Lindgren prior to commencing this action. His claimed right to retain possession is rested upon…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Income Properties Investment Corp. v. TrefethenWashington Supreme Court · 1930
  2. Andersonian Investment Co. v. WadeWashington Supreme Court · 1919
  3. Teater v. KingWashington Supreme Court · 1904
  4. Zinn v. KnopesWashington Supreme Court · 1920
  5. Brown v. BaruchWashington Supreme Court · 1901

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Peoples National Bank v. OstranderCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1971
  2. Powers v. HastingsWashington Supreme Court · 1980
  3. Josephinium Associates v. KahliCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2002
  4. Josephinium Associates v. KahliCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2002
  5. Motoda v. DonohoeCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1969

4 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