Legal Opinion

Boules v. Gull Industries, Inc.

Court of Appeals of Washington

Decided May 16, 2006No. 33381-3-IIPublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

¶1 Hyung and Mikyong Kim appeal the trial court’s denial of their request for reasonable attorney fees following Fayek and Sonia Boules’ voluntary dismissal of their fraudulent concealment action against the Kims arising from the purchase and sale of a gas station. The Kims argue that they are entitled to reasonable attorney fees under the contract’s attorney-fee provision because the Bouleses’ action arose out of the purchase and sale transaction. Holding that the contract’s attorney-fee provision applies, we reverse and remand to the trial court to deter*87mine and to award the Kims their…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Berg v. HudesmanWashington Supreme Court · 1990
  2. Ethridge v. HwangCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2001
  3. Ethridge v. HwangCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2001
  4. Granite Equipment Leasing Corp. v. HuttonWashington Supreme Court · 1974
  5. Puget Sound Mutual Savings Bank v. LillionsWashington Supreme Court · 1957

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Bartlett v. BetlachCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2006
  2. Bartlett v. BetlachCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2006

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API