Thomas & Co. v. Hillis
Washington Supreme Court
Appeal from an order of the superior court for , King county, Gay, J., entered January 24, 1911, granting a new trial for insufficiency of the evidence, after the verdict of a jury rendered in favor of the defendants, in an action on a promissory note.
1Opinion of the CourtEllis, J.
Action by respondent upon a promissory note for $4,812.50, alleged to have been made and delivered to Northern Pacific Irrigation Company by appellants, and indorsed after maturity to respondent. The answer admits the signing of the note, denies delivery,- and sets up as an affirmative defense that the note was signed as part of a transaction in which respondent acted as agent for the irrigation company in the sale of certain lands to appellants; that a contract for the purchase of the lands was signed by appellants and, together with the note, was left with the respondent upon a promise not…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Rotting v. ClemanWashington Supreme Court · 1895
- Sylvester v. OlsonWashington Supreme Court · 1911
- Port Blakely Mill Co. v. Springfield Fire & Marine InsuranceWashington Supreme Court · 1910
- Hughes v. Dexter Horton & Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1901
- Angus v. WambaWashington Supreme Court · 1908
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Brown v. City of Walla WallaWashington Supreme Court · 1913
- Snider v. Washington Water Power Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1912
- State v. BrentWashington Supreme Court · 1948
- Thomas & Co. v. HillisWashington Supreme Court · 1912
- Holloway v. SavageWashington Supreme Court · 1912
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.