Legal Opinion
Homann v. Huber
Washington Supreme Court
Decided March 9, 1951No. 31310PublishedCited by 18 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtRobinson, J.
— The principal, and practically only serious, question presented by this appeal involves the priority of liens.
The action was tried upon the first amended complaint of A. G. Homann and the answer thereto, and cross-complaint of James Construction Company and Homann’s reply thereto. In his complaint, Homann alleged: (1) that H. H. Huber, Harold Schmitt, and G. I. Griffith, at the time the complaint was filed, and prior thereto, were owners of certain lands in Thurston county (particularly describing them) upon which they, as copartners, did business under the name of Midfield Packers; (2)…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Rankin v. ScottSupreme Court of the United States · 1827
- United States Rubber Co. of California v. American Bonding Co. of BaltimoreWashington Supreme Court · 1915
- Rathke v. GriffithWashington Supreme Court · 1950
- Hollenbeck v. City of SeattleWashington Supreme Court · 1925
- Nason v. Northwestern Milling & Power Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1897
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- Jackson v. FlohrCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1955
- BNC Mortgage, Inc. v. Tax Pros, Inc.Court of Appeals of Washington · 2002
- BNC Mortgage, Inc. v. Tax Pros, Inc.Court of Appeals of Washington · 2002
- Summerhill Village Homeowners Ass'n v. RoughleyCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2012
- CH2M Hill, Inc. v. Greg Bogart & Co.Court of Appeals of Washington · 1987
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.