Legal Opinion

Case v. Dundom

Court of Appeals of Washington

Decided January 10, 2003No. 27906-1-IIPublished

1Opinion of the Court

58 P.3d 919 (2002)

Ted CASE, Respondent,

v.

Bary DUNDOM and "Jane Doe" Dundom, husband and wife; also any other Parties Unknown Claiming any Right, Title, Estate, Lien or Interest in the Real Estate Described in the Complaint Herein, Appellants.

No. 27906-1-II.

Court of Appeals of Washington, Division 2.

December 6, 2002.

As Amended January 10, 2003.

William E. Morgan, Hoquiam, WA, for Appellants.

William Stewart, Montesano, WA, for Respondent.

BRIDGEWATER, J.

Bary Dundom appeals the trial court's default judgment against him which quieted title to certain real property in Ted Case. Dundom claims that…

Also in this document: Dissent.

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. State v. GreenwoodWashington Supreme Court · 1993
  2. Bishop v. MicheWashington Supreme Court · 1999
  3. Bishop v. MicheWashington Supreme Court · 1999
  4. Scannell v. City of SeattleWashington Supreme Court · 1983
  5. Ross v. Citifinancial, Inc.District Court, S.D. Mississippi · 2001

7 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