Legal Opinion

Washington Brick, Lime & Sewer Pipe Co. v. Anderson

Washington Supreme Court

Decided February 15, 1934No. 24866. Department OnePublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSteinert, J.

— In its complaint containing three causes of action, plaintiff sought to recover for quantities of building material furnished and delivered by it to defendant. The answer of the defendant contained certain denials; then, by way of an affirmative defense, pleaded an offset and counterclaim, and concluded with a cross-complaint setting forth a series of five separate causes of action against the plaintiff. Trial was had before a jury. A verdict having been returned in favor of defendant, judgment was entered thereon, from which plaintiff has appealed.

The respondent, in 1930, entered into a…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Hopper v. . SageNew York Court of Appeals · 1889
  2. Scudder v. BradburyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1871
  3. Jarecki Manufacturing Co. v. MerriamSupreme Court of Kansas · 1919
  4. Johns v. JaycoxWashington Supreme Court · 1912
  5. Wilkins v. KessingerWashington Supreme Court · 1916

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Barbee Mill Co. v. StateWashington Supreme Court · 1953
  2. Dingler v. SimpsonIdaho Supreme Court · 1961
  3. Dant & Russell, Inc. v. Grays Harbor Exportation Co.District Court, W.D. Washington · 1939
  4. Douglass v. StacheckiCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1975
  5. Seattle Flower & Bulb Co. v. E. S. Burgan & Sons, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 1954

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

Powered by the Exa API