Glassmaker v. Ricard
Court of Appeals of Washington
1Opinion of the CourtGreen, C.J.
The plaintiffs brought this action against the defendants to collect the accelerated balance of a promissory note which was in default. The trial court concluded that acceleration was not justified because the delinquent installment payment had been made before the defendants were actually apprised of plaintiffs' election to accelerate the balance. From a judgment for the defendants, the plaintiffs appeal. We affirm.
The sole issue is whether plaintiffs, by the mere filing of a summons and complaint, effectively exercised their option to accelerate the balance due on the promissory note.
In…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Weinberg v. NaherWashington Supreme Court · 1909
- Puget Sound Mutual Savings Bank v. LillionsWashington Supreme Court · 1957
- Miles v. Chinto Mining Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1944
- AAC CORPORATION v. ReedWashington Supreme Court · 1968
- Jacobson v. McClanahanWashington Supreme Court · 1953
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- 4518 S. 256th, LLC v. Karen L. Gibbon, PSCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2016
- Sandra M. Merceri v. The Bank Of New York MellonCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2018
- Terhune v. N. Cascade Tr. Servs., Inc.Court of Appeals of Washington · 2019
- HC Clark Implement Co., Inc. v. WiedmerSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1986
- Mitchell International Enterprises, Inc. v. DalyCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1983
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.