Legal Opinion

Barkley v. Barton

Washington Supreme Court

Decided June 23, 1896No. 2158PublishedCited by 3 opinions

Appeal from Superior Court, Snohomish County. —Hon. John C. Denney, Judge.

1Opinion of the Court

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Hoyt, C. J.

Respondents have filed a motion to strike the statement of facts for the reason that a copy thereof was not served upon them as required by law. It appears from the record that the statement was first served on the 13th day of May, 1895, and that it was not filed until May 14, 1895, and under the authority of Erickson v. Erickson, 11 Wash. 76 (39 Pac. 241), and Boyle v. Great Northern Ry. Co., 13 Wash. 383 (43 Pac. 344), it must be held that such service was ineffectual. In January, 1896, further service of the statement was attempted to be…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Erickson v. EricksonWashington Supreme Court · 1895
  2. Boyle v. Great Northern Railway Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1896

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Fidelity Trust Co. v. PalmerWashington Supreme Court · 1900
  2. State v. YandellWashington Supreme Court · 1904
  3. State ex rel. Palmer Mountain Tunnel & Power Co. v. Superior CourtWashington Supreme Court · 1911

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API