Legal Opinion

Harrington v. Miller

Washington Supreme Court

Decided October 3, 1892No. 574PublishedCited by 9 opinions

Appeal from Superior Court, King County.

1Opinion of the Court

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Anders, G. J. —

Harrington & Smith, who were co-partners, brought this action to establish and foreclose a lien on certain premises described in the complaint, for materials furnished for use in the construction thereon of a three-story brick building. • By order of the court, this action was consolidated with several others of like character, for the purpose of trial. At and prior to the time of the *809erection of said building, tbe defendant, Mary M. Miller, was, and she still is, the owner of the fee of the lands described, and one W. H. Cowie, and one…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Dunphy v. RiddleIllinois Supreme Court · 1877
  2. Hughes v. DavisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1870
  3. Rose v. Persse & Brooks Paper WorksSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1860
  4. De Espinosa v. GregoryCalifornia Supreme Court · 1870
  5. Brophy Mining Co. v. Brophy & Dale Gold & Silver Mining Co.Nevada Supreme Court · 1880

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Sunburst Oil & Refining Co. v. CallenderMontana Supreme Court · 1929
  2. Hartfield v. GreberTexas Commission of Appeals · 1918
  3. St. Paul & Tacoma Lumber Co. v. BoltonWashington Supreme Court · 1893
  4. Ford v. Springer Land Ass'nNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1895
  5. Sewell v. SpitzerTexas Commission of Appeals · 1921

4 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