Hinckley v. Casey
Washington Supreme Court
Cross-appeals from a judgment of the superior court for King c'ounty, Albertson, J., entered November 33, 1906, upon the verdict of a jury rendered in favor of the plaintiffs, in an action for unlawful detainer.
1Opinion of the CourtRudkin, J.
This was an action for unlawful detainer and for double damages. The jury returned a verdict in favor of the plaintiffs and assessed the damages for the unlawful detention of the premises in the sum of $150. Judgment was entered on the verdict for a restitution of the premises, but the court refused to award anything more than. single damages as found by the jury. Both parties have appealed from the judgment, but the appeal on .the part of the defendants has been abandoned, and the right of the plaintiffs to double damages under Bal. Code, § 5543 (P. C., § 1185), is the sole question for…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Bond v. ChapmanWashington Supreme Court · 1904
- Hart v. PrattWashington Supreme Court · 1898
- Quandt v. SmithWashington Supreme Court · 1902
3Cited by10 opinions
- Sprincin King Street Partners v. Sound Conditioning Club, Inc.Court of Appeals of Washington · 1996
- Golden v. MountWashington Supreme Court · 1949
- Gazzam v. YoungWashington Supreme Court · 1921
- O'Connell v. AraiWashington Supreme Court · 1911
- Western Union Telegraph Co. v. Hansen & Rowland Corp.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1948
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.