Legal Opinion

Zioncheck v. Hepden

Washington Supreme Court

Decided July 8, 1927No. 20592. Department OnePublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMain, J.

By this action the plaintiff seeks to recover upon a promise made for her benefit, but not to her’ The cause was tried to the court and a jury and resulted in a verdict against the defendants James Hepden and Charles I. Neff in the sum of $1,505.35. Motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict and in the alternative for a new trial was interposed and overruled. Judgment was entered upon the verdict from which Hepden and Neff appeal.

The preliminary facts may be summarized as follows: A partnership composed of P. B. Groshong, William J. Nadeau and C. J. Kneeland, the latter being a silent…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Union Machinery & Supply Co. v. DarnellWashington Supreme Court · 1916
  2. Bartels v. McCulloughOregon Supreme Court · 1921
  3. Hart v. BogleWashington Supreme Court · 1915

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Grand Lodge of Scandinavian Fraternity of America, District No. 7 v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1940
  2. Stover v. Winston Bros. Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1936
  3. Cascade Timber Co. v. Northern Pacific Railway Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1947
  4. Olson v. ChapmanWashington Supreme Court · 1940
  5. Black v. YoderWashington Supreme Court · 1933

5 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