Legal Opinion

Rachow v. Philbrick & Nicholson

Washington Supreme Court

Decided June 25, 1928No. 21044. Department OnePublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtTolman, J.

Appellant Philbrick & Nicholson, Inc., contracted with the state through its highway committee to clear, grade and construct a certain state highway. Appellant Maryland Casualty Company became the surety on the contractor’s bond given to the state. After the work was completed and accepted by the state, thirteen separate actions were commenced in the superior court for Thurston county against the contractor, the bond and the reserve fund in the hands of the state. Eleven of these actions were to recover for material and supplies furnished to and through respondents Eachow and A. E. Wilber,…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. National Surety Co. v. Bratnober Lumber Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1912
  2. United States Rubber Co. of California v. American Bonding Co. of BaltimoreWashington Supreme Court · 1915
  3. Carstens & Earles, Inc. v. City of SeattleWashington Supreme Court · 1915
  4. Tatum v. GeistWashington Supreme Court · 1905
  5. Sligh v. Shelton Southwestern RailroadWashington Supreme Court · 1898

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Maryland Casualty Co. v. City of TacomaWashington Supreme Court · 1939
  2. Shope Enterprises, Inc. v. Kent School DistrictCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1985
  3. H. Earl Clack Co. v. StauntonMontana Supreme Court · 1937
  4. Airefco, Inc. v. Yelm Community Schools No. 2Court of Appeals of Washington · 1988
  5. Austin v. C. v. Wilder & Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1965

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