Legal Opinion

Lindquist v. Mullen

Washington Supreme Court

Decided December 9, 1954No. 32795Published

1Opinion of the Court

45 Wn.2d 675 (1954)

277 P.2d 724

MABEL LINDQUIST, Appellant,

v.

BERNARD P. MULLEN et al., Respondents.[1]

No. 32795.

The Supreme Court of Washington, En Banc.

December 9, 1954.

Carl F. Christophersen and A.L. Newbould, for appellant.

Eggerman, Rosling & Williams and Allan R. Carpenter, Jr., for respondents.

MALLERY, J.

The trial court sustained defendant's demurrer. Plaintiff appeals from the judgment of dismissal.

Appellant contends the trial court erred in holding that her action was barred by the three-year statute of limitations. RCW 4.16.080(2) [cf. Rem. Rev. Stat. (Sup.), § 159].

The action is…

Also in this document: Concurrence.

2Cases cited35 opinions

  1. Mohr v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1905
  2. Huysman v. KirschCalifornia Supreme Court · 1936
  3. Schmucking v. MayoSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1931
  4. Crossett Health Center v. CroswellSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1953
  5. Burton v. TribbleSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1934

30 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