Legal Opinion
City of Raymond v. Armstrong
Washington Supreme Court
Decided January 11, 1922No. 16551PublishedCited by 1 opinion
Appeal from a judgment of the superior court for Pacific county, Hewen, J., entered April 27,1921, upon findings in favor of certain defendants, in an action in interpleader, tried to the court.
1Opinion of the CourtMitchell, J.
— B. F. Armstrong and Minnie R. Armstrong, husband and wife, were the owners of the N. E. % of the N. W. % of sec. 24, and the S. E. % of the S. W. % of sec. 13, township 14, north, of range 9, west, W. M., in Pacific county, and on June 19,1906, entered into a contract with the Raymond Light & Water Company, at that time operating a water system and supplying water to the town of Raymond, to the effect and upon terms as follows:
“Now Therefore, for and in consideration of the sum of $75 to be paid to the first parties by the second party on or before the first day of April of each and every…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Pinkum v. City of Eau ClaireWisconsin Supreme Court · 1892
- City of Raymond v. Willapa Power Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1918
3Cited by1 opinion
- Model Water & Light Co. v. DicksonWashington Supreme Court · 1933