Legal Opinion

Riverside Finance Co. v. Griffith

Washington Supreme Court

Decided August 30, 1926No. 19963. Department OnePublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHolcomb, J.

— In a prior action in wbieb these same appellants were defendants, respondent recovered judgment for two thousand dollars against J. H. Griffith, solely, for a surety debt, the other spouse being dismissed. In that action it was alleged that the note had been executed for and on behalf of the community composed of appellants.

Appellants each there appeared separately, and each answered the allegation of the plaintiff therein that the note was a community obligation, by denying tbe same, and it was alleged, on tbe contrary, tbat tbe obligation was a separate one of the husband. It was also…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Brown v. ScofieldWashington Supreme Court · 1923
  2. Finn v. FinnWashington Supreme Court · 1919
  3. Dobbins v. Dexter Horton & Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1911
  4. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. LeeWashington Supreme Court · 1910
  5. Graves v. Columbia UnderwritersWashington Supreme Court · 1916

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. In Re Binge's EstateWashington Supreme Court · 1940
  2. Estate of Dougherty v. MillerWashington Supreme Court · 1947
  3. W. T. Rawleigh Co. v. McLeodWashington Supreme Court · 1929
  4. Walker v. FowlerWashington Supreme Court · 1930
  5. Finley v. FinleyWashington Supreme Court · 1955

6 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