Legal Opinion

Stott v. Cervantes

Court of Appeals of Washington

Decided May 15, 1979No. 2664-3PublishedCited by 18 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRoe, J.

Plaintiffs Stott contracted to purchase certain real property from defendants Cervantes. Paragraph 18 of the contract provided:

Attorney's Fees and Venue — In the event of any lawsuit between the parties to this contract to settle issues arising hereunder, the prevailing party shall recover judgment against the other party for a reasonable attorney's fee.

(Italics ours.) Believing there had been misrepresentations as to the condition of the real estate, plaintiffs sued defendants for either rescission or $10,000 damages. At trial the prayer for rescission was abandoned, but the court awarded…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Ennis v. RingWashington Supreme Court · 1959
  2. Aquarian Foundation v. KTVW, INC.Court of Appeals of Washington · 1974
  3. Artz v. O'BANNONCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1977
  4. Snider v. WrightWashington Supreme Court · 1920

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. Marassi v. LauCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1993
  2. Silverdale Hotel Associates v. Lomas & Nettleton Co.Court of Appeals of Washington · 1984
  3. Agnew v. Lacey Co-PlyCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1982
  4. Western Stud Welding, Inc. v. Omark Industries, Inc.Court of Appeals of Washington · 1986
  5. Sardam v. MorfordCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1988

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

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

Powered by the Exa API