Legal Opinion

Taylor v. Wilbur

Washington Supreme Court

Decided November 28, 1932No. 23889. Department TwoPublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMain, J.

— This action is based upon two bonds, one an attachment bond and the other given in the garnishment proceeding. When the case came on for trial before the court without a jury, the plaintiff’s counsel made an opening statement, which was followed by an opening statement by the counsel for the defendants which concluded with a motion

“For dismissal of the actions on counsel’s statement, and on the further ground there is a misjoinder of parties and a misjoinder of causes of action, and on the further ground that. the complaint does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action.”

The…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Levy v. Fleischner, Mayer & Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1895
  2. James v. CannellWashington Supreme Court · 1925
  3. Hogue v. McAllisterWashington Supreme Court · 1922
  4. Wilbur v. TaylorWashington Supreme Court · 1929
  5. Wild Rose Orchard Co. v. CritzerWashington Supreme Court · 1914

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Maib v. Maryland Casualty Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1943
  2. Petrich v. McDonaldWashington Supreme Court · 1954
  3. Huzzy v. Culbert Construction Co.Court of Appeals of Washington · 1971
  4. Olsen v. National Grocery Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1942
  5. American Surety Company of New York v. NashArizona Supreme Court · 1964

5 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