Legal Opinion

Searl v. Shell Oil Company

Washington Supreme Court

Decided April 19, 1933No. 24231. Department TwoPublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSteinert, J.

The complaint herein seeks recovery upon two causes of action: (1) for an amount representing rebates or loss of profits alleged to have been earned on the purchase of certain quantities of gaso line; and (2) for rentals alleged to be due and owing under a lease of a gasoline station. By its cross-complaint, defendant seeks recovery of a small balance owing for gasoline sold and delivered. Issues having been joined between the parties, the action was tried before the court, sitting without a jury, and resulted in finding’s and conclusions favorable to defendant, upon which judgment was…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Kanaskat Lumber & Shingle Co. v. Cascade Timber Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1914
  2. Fairbanks Steam Shovel Co. v. Holt & JefferyWashington Supreme Court · 1914
  3. Shell Oil Co. v. WrightWashington Supreme Court · 1932
  4. Tacoma Mill Co. v. Northern Pacific Railway Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1916
  5. Thomson & Stacy Co. v. Evans, Coleman & EvansWashington Supreme Court · 1918

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Bond v. WiegardtWashington Supreme Court · 1950
  2. Shell Oil Co. v. HenryWashington Supreme Court · 1933
  3. Ferguson v. Associated Oil Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1933
  4. Johnson v. Shell Oil Co. of CaliforniaWashington Supreme Court · 1936
  5. Johnson v. Shell Oil Co. of CaliforniaWashington Supreme Court · 1936

1 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