Legal Opinion

Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. Grant

Washington Supreme Court

Decided June 14, 1956No. 33470PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHill, J.

In an action by Sears, Roebuck and Company, Inc. (hereinafter referred to as Sears), to recover possession of certain crop sprinkling equipment or its value, the defendant, Theodore Grant (formerly Theodore Gruzdis), made a counterclaim for damages for the loss of a forty-acre wheat crop. Grant claimed that delay in the delivery of 320 feet of two-inch aluminum pipe necessary as laterals in the operation of his sprinkling system caused the loss of the crop. The ultimate issue on this appeal is whether Grant proved damages in the amount of $2,828 which the jury found he sustained. (The…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Florence Fish Co. v. Everett Packing Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1920
  2. Lopeman v. GeeWashington Supreme Court · 1952
  3. Chung v. Louie Fong Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1924

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Little v. RoseSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1974
  2. Jet Boats, Inc. v. Puget Sound National BankCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1986
  3. Nelson Equipment Co. v. EstepWashington Supreme Court · 1957

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

Powered by the Exa API