Legal Opinion

Robison v. Laforge

Washington Supreme Court

Decided December 11, 1933No. 24689. Department TwoPublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHolcomb, J.

Respondent, being dissatisfied with a financial investment of more than one thousand dollars made by appellant with funds entrusted to him by respondent, which respondent believed would be a total loss, on February 16, 1932, went to the office of appellant to seek an adjustment which would prevent loss. The details of their business affair are not necessary to recite, as they cannot affect this case; besides which, litigation is now pending between these parties to de termine the liability. Appellant invited respondent behind the counter in his office and to sit down in a customer’s chair…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. State v. MillerWashington Supreme Court · 1926
  2. Howell v. WintersWashington Supreme Court · 1910
  3. Allen v. HannafordWashington Supreme Court · 1926
  4. Hart v. GeyselWashington Supreme Court · 1930
  5. Milam v. MilamWashington Supreme Court · 1907

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. State v. LadigesWashington Supreme Court · 1965
  2. Schmidt v. SchmidtWashington Supreme Court · 1958
  3. Atchley v. McFaddenSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1936

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API