Legal Opinion

Rumpf v. Barto

Washington Supreme Court

Decided December 26, 1894No. 1443PublishedCited by 7 opinions

Appeal from Superior Court, King County.

1Opinion of the Court

*383The opinion of the court was delivered by

Stiles, J.

Replevin of diamond jewelry of the alleged value of $352.50. Verdict for pláintiffs, assessing the value at $275. Respondents delivered the jewelry in question to one Reichart, with the following memorandum :

“These goods are sent for your inspection, the property of Rumpf & Mayer, and to be returned to them within “demand” [in writing] days. Sale only takes effect from date of their approval of your selection, and until then goods are to be held subject to their order.” (Description.)

Appellants claim that this paper shows a conditional sale,…

2Cited by7 opinions

  1. Eatonville State Bank v. MarshallWashington Supreme Court · 1932
  2. Wesco Supply Co. v. Incorporated Town of AllertonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1912
  3. Eisenberg v. NicholsWashington Supreme Court · 1900
  4. Orillia Lumber Co. v. Chicago, Milwaukee & Puget Sound Railway Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1915
  5. Orilla Lumber Co. v. Chicago, Milwaukee & Puget Sound Railway Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1914

2 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