Legal Opinion

Herz v. Ransom

Washington Supreme Court

Decided June 29, 1932No. 23273. Department OnePublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSteinert, J.

-The plaintiff brought this action against the defendant to recover a commission under an oral contract. The cause was tried before the court without a jury, and resulted in a judgment for plaintiff, from which the defendant appealed.

The appellant in his brief has moved that certain portions of the statement of facts be stricken. The respondent has countered with a motion that the entire statement of facts be stricken.

The case presents a somewhat unusual, though not entirely novel, situation. Trial was had before the late esteemed Judge Mitchell Gilliam on January 14, 1931. Findings of fact,…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Grays Harbor Boom Co. v. LownsdaleWashington Supreme Court · 1909
  2. Petro Paint Manufacturing Co. v. TaylorWashington Supreme Court · 1928

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Bales v. City of TacomaWashington Supreme Court · 1933
  2. Puget Sound National Bank of Tacoma v. OlsenWashington Supreme Court · 1933
  3. Snodderly v. BrothertonWashington Supreme Court · 1933
  4. Grimes v. FraserWashington Supreme Court · 1934
  5. Rockwell v. PeyranWashington Supreme Court · 1933

2 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