Legal Opinion

Rorvig v. Douglas

Washington Supreme Court

Decided May 19, 1994No. 60183-6PublishedCited by 65 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJohnson, J.

Petitioners were denied recovery of the legal expenses incurred in the quiet title portion of their successful slander of title action. Legal expenses, including attorney fees, incurred in clearing the slandered title have not been recoverable as damages in accordance with the rule set out in McGuinness v. Hargiss, 56 Wash. 162, 105 P. 233 (1909). Petitioners request this court to overrule McGuinness *856and hold such fees are recoverable as special damages. Respondents have cross-petitioned the ruling of the Court of Appeals affirming the trial court’s findings that the parties did not have an…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Brown v. Safeway Stores, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 1980
  2. State Ex Rel. MacRi v. City of BremertonWashington Supreme Court · 1941
  3. Haner v. Quincy Farm Chemicals, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 1982
  4. Cecil v. DominyWashington Supreme Court · 1966
  5. Rayl v. Shull Enterprises, Inc.Idaho Supreme Court · 1985

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

3Cited by65 opinions

  1. Rettkowski v. Department of EcologyWashington Supreme Court · 1996
  2. Sea-Van Investments Associates v. HamiltonWashington Supreme Court · 1994
  3. Dempere v. NelsonCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1994
  4. City of Seattle v. McCreadyWashington Supreme Court · 1997
  5. Sumner Hill Homeowners' Ass'n v. Rio Mesa Holdings, LLCCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2012

60 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