Legal Opinion
State v. Hovrud
Court of Appeals of Washington
Decided February 22, 1991No. 13082-3-IIPublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtWorswick, C.J.
The State appeals an order in arrest of judgment (CrR 7.4), setting aside Kurt Hovrud's conviction for false swearing. RCW 9A.72.040. We affirm.
Hovrud allegedly lied under oath while being interrogated by his insurance company's lawyer, who was investigating Hovrud's fire loss claim. The examination under oath was required by a provision in Hovrud's standard form insurance policy.
RCW 9A.72.040 provides, in relevant part:(1) A person is guilty of false swearing if he makes a false statement, which he knows to be false, under an oath required or authorized by law.
(Italics ours.) Unlike the…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited9 opinions
- State v. HornadayWashington Supreme Court · 1986
- Knowles v. HollyWashington Supreme Court · 1973
- State v. DougallWashington Supreme Court · 1977
- State v. DevittWisconsin Supreme Court · 1978
- People v. WatsonAppellate Court of Illinois · 1980
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- City of Bothell v. GutschmidtCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1995
- Donald R. Swank v. Valley Christian SchoolCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2016
- State v. JohnsonCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1992
- State Farm Indemnity Co. v. WarringtonNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 2002
- State v. HovrudCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1991