Legal Opinion
Booten v. Peterson
Washington Supreme Court
Decided October 13, 1955No. 33091PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtSchwellenbach, J.
This is the second appeal in this case. See Booten v. Peterson, 34 Wn. (2d) 563, 209 P. (2d) 349. We refer to the prior opinion for a statement of the facts, background, and circumstances leading up to the litigation. Subsequent to the first trial, Mrs. Peterson sold to the Merediths, and they were added as parties defendant.
The controversy involves a boundary line between beach lots located on Hood Canal. At this time, the Bootens and the Merediths, successors in interest to Nellie Peterson, hold deeds to the adjoining lots.
In 1947, Booten and wife instituted an action alleging that the…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- In Re SchmitzWashington Supreme Court · 1954
- O'BRIEN v. SchultzWashington Supreme Court · 1954
- Buob v. Feenaughty MacHinery Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1940
- Taylor v. TalmadgeWashington Supreme Court · 1954
- Johnson v. ConnerWashington Supreme Court · 1908
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Chaplin v. SandersWashington Supreme Court · 1984
- Roche v. Town of FairfieldSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1982
- Frolund v. FranklandWashington Supreme Court · 1967
- Reitz v. KnightCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1991
- Larson v. TonnesonNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2019
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.