Legal Opinion

Reiner v. Pittsburg Des Moines Corp.

Washington Supreme Court

Decided April 19, 1984No. 49982-9PublishedCited by 23 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtUtter, J.

Petitioner, Burns & Roe, Inc. seeks reinstatement of the trial court's dismissal of respondent's suit for his alleged failure to properly serve petitioner with process. We find that the service was adequate and affirm the Court of Appeals.

On August 23, 1978, Harry Reiner was injured while working as a pipefitter at the Hanford Project. He commenced this personal injury action against several defendants, including petitioner Burns & Roe, Inc., a New Jersey corporation. On August 19, 1981, a process server took a copy of the summons and complaint to the home of Charles Robinson, an employee of…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Marathon Battery Company v. KilpatrickSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1965
  2. Thayer v. EdmondsCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1972
  3. Mason v. Freeman National Printing Equipment Co.Appellate Court of Illinois · 1977
  4. Crose v. Volkswagenwerk AktiengesellschaftWashington Supreme Court · 1977
  5. Southeastern Fidelity Insurance v. HeardCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1971

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

3Cited by23 opinions

  1. Martin v. MeierWashington Supreme Court · 1988
  2. Union Bay Preservation Coalition v. Cosmos Development & Administration Corp.Washington Supreme Court · 1995
  3. Union Bay Pres. Coal. v. COSMOS DEVELOP.Washington Supreme Court · 1995
  4. Martin v. TriolWashington Supreme Court · 1993
  5. Nitardy v. Snohomish CountyWashington Supreme Court · 1986

18 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