Legal Opinion

Tonkoff v. Roche Fruit & Produce Co.

Washington Supreme Court

Decided January 4, 1926No. 19513. Department TwoPublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMackintosh, J.

According to the amended complaint, between September 1, 1923, and June 30, 1924, the respondent delivered to the appellant, a commission merchant, for sale on commission, a large quantity of apples, and the appellant deducted from the proceeds of the sale over $2,000; it is claimed that, pursuant to ch. 134, Laws of 1923, p. 366 [Rem. 1923 Sup., § 8292], the appellant could not have legally charged over $1,200. The prayer is made for the amount of the over-payment. According to the appellant’s answer, the respondent and appellant entered into an oral contract by which the appellant was to…

2Cases cited22 opinions

  1. Chew Heong v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
  2. Price v. HopkinMichigan Supreme Court · 1865
  3. Rice v. RuddimanMichigan Supreme Court · 1862
  4. Mayborne v. Citizens Trust & Savings BankCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1920
  5. Stewart v. SmithCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1907

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. In Re F.D. Processing, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 1992
  2. Gillis v. King CountyWashington Supreme Court · 1953
  3. Tracy v. BartonWashington Supreme Court · 1926
  4. Dent Lumber & Shingle Co. v. Cedarhome Lumber Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1927
  5. Gronvold v. WhaleyWashington Supreme Court · 1951

5 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