Legal Opinion

Estes v. Brewster Cigar Co.

Washington Supreme Court

Decided April 23, 1930No. 21840. En BancPublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtFullerton, J.

The appellant, Estes, instituted the present action against the respondents Brewster Cigar Co., Inc., and M. Gr. Daymude, and the defendant Clarence E. Failing, to recover for personal injuries. To the second amended complaint of the appellant, the respondents interposed a demurrer, based upon three of the statutory grounds, namely: (1) That there is a defect of parties defendant; (2) that several causes of action have been improperly united; and (3) that the complaint does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. The trial court sustained the demurrer, whereupon the…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Lake v. Atlantic WorksMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1872
  2. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Rld. v. StanfordSupreme Court of Kansas · 1874
  3. Hellan v. Supply Laundry Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1917
  4. Matsuda v. HammondWashington Supreme Court · 1913
  5. Eskildsen v. City of SeattleWashington Supreme Court · 1902

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

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Kuehn v. WhiteCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1979
  2. Hein v. Chrysler Corp.Washington Supreme Court · 1954
  3. La Lone v. SmithWashington Supreme Court · 1951
  4. Paulyne B. McCall as the Administratrix of the Estate of Virgil C. McCall Deceased v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1964
  5. Westerland v. Argonaut GrillWashington Supreme Court · 1936

9 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