Mueller v. Winston Bros. Co.
Washington Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtBeeler, J.
— The first question presented fop our determination is whether the amended complaint states a cause of action ex contractu or ex delicto. The appellants contend that the action is one to recover damages for the breach of an oral contract, and consequently the statute (Rem. Comp. Stat., § 183), which confers a right of action for wrongful death, does not apply. On the other hand, the respondent maintains, and the trial court so held, that the action is one sounding in tort. The cause was tried on that theory, and the respondent was awarded damages for the wrongful death of her husband, Albert…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Nelson v. HarringtonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1888
- Robertson v. Charles B. Towns HospitalAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1917
- Galveston, Harrisburg & San Antonio Railway Co. v. HenneganCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1903
- Rochester v. Wells, Fargo & Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1912
- Wilcox v. CarrollWashington Supreme Court · 1923
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Hein v. Chrysler Corp.Washington Supreme Court · 1954
- Yeager v. DunnavanWashington Supreme Court · 1946
- Vesel v. Jardine Mining Co.Montana Supreme Court · 1940
- Physicians' & Dentists' Business Bureau v. DrayWashington Supreme Court · 1941
- Compton v. EvansWashington Supreme Court · 1939
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.