Heermans v. Blakeslee
Washington Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment of the superior court for Thurs-ton county, Mitchell, J., entered March 13, 1916, dismissing an action for an accounting, upon sustaining a demurrer to the complaint.
1Opinion of the Court
*648On Rehearing.
Mount, J.
The original opinion in this case may be found in 93 Wash. 595, 161 Pac. 489. We there affirmed the judgment of the lower court upon the ground that the contract in question was, in substance, a chattel mortgage, and because the same was not accompanied by an -affidavit of good faith and was not acknowledged and recorded, we held that it was void as a chattel mortgage, and for that reason, affirmed the judgment. A petition for a rehearing was after-wards granted, and the case was argued to the court sitting En Banc. A majority of the judges are now of the opinion that…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Bellingham Bay Boom Co. v. BrisboisWashington Supreme Court · 1896
- Heermans v. BlakesleeWashington Supreme Court · 1916
3Cited by10 opinions
- J. W. Fales Co. v. O. H. Seiple Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1933
- Monegan v. Pacific National BankCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1976
- Gem State Lumber Co. v. Galion Irrigated Land Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1935
- Mercantile Insurance Co. of America v. JacksonWashington Supreme Court · 1952
- Farmers State Bank v. ScheelWashington Supreme Court · 1923
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.