Legal Opinion

Philip v. City of Seattle

Washington Supreme Court

Decided July 11, 1938No. 27144. Department OnePublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtGeraghty, J.

Plaintiff’s amended complaint alleged that, on July 6, 1937, the city of Seattle, defendant, was indebted to H. A. Bechtel & Son, copartners, in the sum of $808.93, for sand and gravel sold and delivered; and that, on that date, the partnership, for a good and valuable consideration, assigned, in writing, the indebtedness to the plaintiff. Copies of three assignments, aggregating the amounts sued for, were attached to the complaint. The assignments identified the funds assigned by reference to the numbers of the requisitions issued by the purchasing department of the city.

The city answered…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. In re Great Western Mfg. Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1907
  2. Terhune v. WeiseWashington Supreme Court · 1925
  3. Hossack v. GrahamWashington Supreme Court · 1898
  4. Nickerson v. HolletWashington Supreme Court · 1928
  5. Lloyd v. SichlerWashington Supreme Court · 1917

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Whiting v. RubinsteinWashington Supreme Court · 1941
  2. Sundstrom v. SundstromWashington Supreme Court · 1942
  3. School District No. 15 v. Peoples National BankWashington Supreme Court · 1942
  4. Sundstrom v. SundstromWashington Supreme Court · 1942

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API