Legal Opinion

Strickler v. Schaaf

Washington Supreme Court

Decided June 24, 1939No. 27316. Department OnePublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMain, J.

The plaintiff, Emma M. Strickler, brought this action seeking injunctive relief against the defendants. After the action was instituted, the Motor Coach Association of this state intervened. The defendant the department of public service and the Motor Coach Association, by cross-complaints, sought an injunction against the plaintiff to prohibit her from transacting the business in which she had been theretofore engaged. The trial was to the court without a jury, and resulted in findings of fact from which the court concluded that the plaintiff was entitled to the relief which she sought, and…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Davis & Banker, Inc. v. NickellWashington Supreme Court · 1923
  2. Commonwealth v. WhiteMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1927
  3. Davis v. ClevingerWashington Supreme Court · 1923
  4. Coleman v. AchimSupreme Court of Florida · 1934
  5. Independent Truck Co. v. WrightWashington Supreme Court · 1929

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Marble v. CleinWashington Supreme Court · 1959
  2. Booth v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1943
  3. Horluck Transportation Co. v. EckrightWashington Supreme Court · 1960
  4. Larson v. Aetna Life InsuranceWashington Supreme Court · 1943
  5. Horluck Transportation Co. v. EckrightWashington Supreme Court · 1960

1 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