Legal Opinion
Normile v. City of Ballard
Washington Supreme Court
Decided December 10, 1903No. 4729PublishedCited by 2 opinions
Appeal from a judgment of the superior court for King county, Morris, J., entered February 1, 1903, upon sustaining a demurrer to the complaint, dismissing an action against a city for damages caused by the unskilfulness of the city engineer.
1Opinion of the CourtDunbar, J.
This action comes here upon the alleged error of the court in sustaining the demurrer to plaintiff’s complaint. It will therefore be necessary to set out the complaint in full. It is as follows:
“1. That the said city of Ballard was, and at all'times hereinafter mentioned, and now is, a municipal corporation, being a city of the third class, organized under and by virtue of the laws of the state of Washington.
“2. That during all the times hereinafter mantioned one H. T. Bostain was the duly appointed, qualified, and acting city engineer of said city, appointed by the city council of said city…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Lee v. . the Village of Sandy HillNew York Court of Appeals · 1869
- Hawks v. Inhabitants of CharlemontMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1871
- Deane v. Inhabitants of RandolphMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1882
- Cavanagh v. City of BostonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1885
- Wendel v. Spokane CountyWashington Supreme Court · 1902
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Humphry v. PortlandOregon Supreme Court · 1916
- Provine v. City of SeattleWashington Supreme Court · 1910