Legal Opinion

Quinn v. Parke & Lacy Machinery Co.

Washington Supreme Court

Decided November 30, 1892No. 570PublishedCited by 9 opinions

Appeal from Superior Court, Spokane County.

1Opinion of the Court

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Dunbar, J.

On June 30, 1890, appellant entered into a written contract for the sale or lease of the machinery in controversy, with the firm of Humphrey & Hamilton. The following is the instrument executed:

“The Parke & Lacy Machinery Company, of Spokane Palls, lessors, hereby lease unto Humphrey & Hamilton, of Deer Park, Washington, lessee, the following property for the period of six (6) months from the 30th day of June, 1890: One Phoenix horizontal engine, class B, size 9-J-xl2, 2-i-inch steam pipe with bandwheel and flywheel of engine 1,231; one…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Harkness v. RussellSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
  2. Meeker v. JohnsonWashington Supreme Court · 1891
  3. Charles H. Dodd & Co. v. Bowles, Washington Territory1888
  4. De Saint Germain v. Wind, Washington Territory1887

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Herring-Marvin Co. v. SmithOregon Supreme Court · 1903
  2. Wittler-Corbin Machinery Co. v. MartinWashington Supreme Court · 1907
  3. Bennett Bros. v. TamMontana Supreme Court · 1900
  4. Quinn v. Parke & Lacy Machinery Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1894
  5. Kidder v. Wittler-Corbin Machinery Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1905

4 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