Legal Opinion

Metropolitan Park District of Tacoma v. Griffith

Washington Supreme Court

Decided July 24, 1986No. 52083-6PublishedCited by 75 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDurham, J.

This case involves two consolidated appeals. Hal E. Griffith appeals from a declaratory judgment determining the parties' rights under a concession agreement. He contends the trial court erred in deciding that two 10-year options to renew a concession agreement were unenforceable, and in concluding that the Metropolitan Park District of Tacoma did not breach the agreement by denying his requests to serve liquor and make improvements. After Griffith filed his appeal, a fire destroyed certain facilities covered by the agreement. The District then brought motions to the trial court to cancel the…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Lonsdale v. ChesterfieldWashington Supreme Court · 1983
  2. State v. KellerCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1982
  3. Wharf Restaurant, Inc. v. Port of SeattleCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1979
  4. Miller v. Othello Packers, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 1966
  5. Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle v. City of SeattleWashington Supreme Court · 1960

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

3Cited by75 opinions

  1. Badgett v. Security State BankWashington Supreme Court · 1991
  2. Zuver v. Airtouch Communications, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 2004
  3. Zuver v. Airtouch Communications, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 2004
  4. Nordstrom Credit, Inc. v. Department of RevenueWashington Supreme Court · 1993
  5. Nearing v. Golden State Foods Corp.Washington Supreme Court · 1990

70 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