Legal Opinion

Lino v. Hole

Washington Supreme Court

Decided October 6, 1930No. 22348. Department TwoPublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtFullerton, J.

— In this action, the plaintiffs, respondents in this court, recovered against the defendants, J. O. Hole and Inga Hole, upon a promissory note. In the complaint, it is alleged that J. C. Hole and Inga Hole are husband and wife; that, on January 4, 1927, while the marriage relationship existed, the defendant J. O. Hole made, executed and delivered to the plaintiffs a promissory note, wherein and whereby he promised and agreed to pay to the order of the plaintiffs, twelve months after the date of the note, the sum of four hundred twenty-one and 16/100 dollars,* and that no part of the note had…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Pitt v. LittleWashington Supreme Court · 1910
  2. Gunderson v. GundersonWashington Supreme Court · 1901
  3. State ex rel. Pacific Loan & Investment Co. v. Superior CourtWashington Supreme Court · 1915
  4. Clark v. EltingeWashington Supreme Court · 1905
  5. Daniel v. Gold Hill Mining Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1902

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Reiner v. Pittsburg Des Moines Corp.Washington Supreme Court · 1984
  2. Liberty Mutual Insurance v. RaptonCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1984
  3. Campbell v. SandyWashington Supreme Court · 1937
  4. Farina v. BrennerNew York Supreme Court · 1992

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

Powered by the Exa API