Legal Opinion

Vance Lumber Co. v. King County

Washington Supreme Court

Decided November 13, 1935No. 25926. En BancPublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Tolman; J.

Respondent, as plaintiff, instituted this action to recover a sum certain which had been paid by it to the county treasurer of King county, under protest, in satisfaction and discharge of taxes on real estate in that county for the years 1931 and 1932. It appears from the complaint that the respondent first tendered to the county treasurer the sum due, less five per cent thereof, pursuant to the provisions of chapter 166, Laws of 1935, p. 553, Rem. 1935 Sup., § 11273-1B [P. C. § 6882-138%a] et seq., and, the tender being refused by the county treasurer, the whole of the tax was paid…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. New York Ex Rel. Hatch v. ReardonSupreme Court of the United States · 1907
  2. Darnell v. IndianaSupreme Court of the United States · 1912
  3. State ex rel. Dillon v. County CourtWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1906
  4. State Ex Rel. Kain v. FischlMontana Supreme Court · 1933
  5. City of Tacoma v. State Tax CommissionWashington Supreme Court · 1934

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Bond v. BurrowsWashington Supreme Court · 1984
  2. King County v. Port of SeattleWashington Supreme Court · 1950
  3. State Ex Rel. Hansen v. SalterWashington Supreme Court · 1937
  4. Heisey v. Port of TacomaWashington Supreme Court · 1940
  5. State Ex Rel. Northern Pacific Railway Co. v. HennefordWashington Supreme Court · 1940

2 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