Legal Opinion

Hertz v. Riebe

Court of Appeals of Washington

Decided May 1, 1997No. 14697-9-IIIPublishedCited by 22 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSweeney, C.J.

A prevailing party is entitled to attorney fees if fees are authorized by contract, statute, or a recognized equitable ground. Seattle-First Nat’l Bank v. Siebol, 64 Wn. App. 401, 409, 824 P.2d 1252, review denied, 119 Wn.2d 1010 (1992); RCW 4.84.330. Donald and Lee Hertz sued Howard and Norma Riebe to rescind an earnest money agreement. They prevailed. The Riebes sued the Hertzes for rent and other damages owed by the Hertzes as a result of their preclosing occupancy of two apartments. The Riebes prevailed. The question here is who, if either, is the prevailing party and therefore entitled…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Marassi v. LauCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1993
  2. Marine Enterprises, Inc. v. Security Pacific Trading Corp.Court of Appeals of Washington · 1988
  3. Seattle-First National Bank v. SiebolCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1992
  4. Rowe v. FloydCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1981
  5. Valley v. HandCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1984

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

3Cited by22 opinions

  1. Pederson v. PotterCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2000
  2. Pederson v. PotterCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2000
  3. Williams v. TilayeWashington Supreme Court · 2012
  4. Dragt v. Dragt/DeTray, LLCCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2007
  5. JDFJ CORP. v. International Raceway, Inc.Court of Appeals of Washington · 1999

17 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