Legal Opinion

Maury v. Toledo Logging Co.

Washington Supreme Court

Decided July 22, 1931No. 23065. Department OnePublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHolcomb, J.

This is an appeal from a judgment in favor of respondent as garnishor against appellant as garnishee defendant, upon a controverted answer of the garnishee defendant, tried by the court.

On October 25,1927, respondent recovered judgment against the principal defendant, Toledo Logging Company, a corporation, in the sum of $5,556; the judgment remained wholly unpaid and unsatisfied except that, by application of the sum of $916.33 previously recovered by garnishment against the same garnishee defendant on October 19, 1926, the balance left due arid unpaid was $1,639.67, with interest thereon…

2Cases cited26 opinions

  1. Burton v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1905
  2. Washington Shoe Manufacturing Co. v. DukeWashington Supreme Court · 1923
  3. Raynor v. Scandinavian-American BankWashington Supreme Court · 1922
  4. McAvoy v. JenningsWashington Supreme Court · 1906
  5. Old National Bank v. GibsonWashington Supreme Court · 1919

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Jemko, Inc. v. LiaghatNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1987
  2. Edward L. Eyre & Co. v. HirschWashington Supreme Court · 1950
  3. Schnitger v. BackusCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1974
  4. Valley Bank & Trust Co. v. ParthumArizona Supreme Court · 1936
  5. First National Bank in Plant City v. McJunkin Corp.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1969

1 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