Follis v. Brinkman
Washington Supreme Court
1Per curiam
In this action, the plaintiffs sought:(1) A judicial determination of the existence of an oral partnership dealing in real estate;(2) An accounting of the profits of the alleged partnership; and(3) Enforcement of an alleged oral agreement between Messrs. Follis and Brinkman, requiring the latter to make a will in favor of the former.
The defendant, Brinkman, cross-complained for money allegedly due him under five promissory notes.
*311After trial to the court, judgment was entered for the defendant on his cross-complaint as to four of the notes, and plaintiffs’ cause of action was dismissed.…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Williams & Mauseth Insurance Brokers, Inc. v. ChappleCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1974
- Greenwood v. BogueWashington Supreme Court · 1959
- Barefield v. BarefieldWashington Supreme Court · 1966
- Follis v. BrinkmanWashington Supreme Court · 1957
- Williams & Mauseth Insurance Brokers, Inc. v. ChappleCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1974
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.