Legal Opinion

Pelly v. Behneman

Washington Supreme Court

Decided June 20, 1932No. 23489. En BancPublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHerman, J.

Plaintiffs sued to rescind a real estate contract entered into between them and defendant September 20, 1927. The snit was instituted against both defendant and her husband. They answered separately, denying, among other things, that the contract was a community obligation. Defendant Belle T. Behneman’s answer also contained an affirmative defense and cross-complaint relating to or alleged to have grown out of the transaction upon which the cause of action alleged in the complaint arose. The trial court entered an order March 23,1931, sustaining a demurrer to the affirmative defense and…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Freeman v. AmbroseWashington Supreme Court · 1895
  2. County of Snohomish v. RuffWashington Supreme Court · 1896
  3. State ex rel. Dunn v. DorseyWashington Supreme Court · 1898
  4. Old National Bank v. O. K. Gold Mining Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1898

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Herbstman v. Eastman Kodak CompanySupreme Court of New Jersey · 1975
  2. Durkheimer Investment Co. v. ZellOregon Supreme Court · 1939
  3. Reagh v. HamiltonWashington Supreme Court · 1938
  4. Donahoe v. PrattWashington Supreme Court · 1937
  5. Patterson v. ZugerWashington Supreme Court · 1936

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