Legal Opinion

Bartel v. Ridgefield Lumber Co.

Washington Supreme Court

Decided October 10, 1924No. 18510PublishedCited by 26 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBridges, J.

Plaintiff: seeks damages and injunction. He appeals because the decision below went against him. The points involved cannot be discussed without a finding with reference to the facts.

Ridgefield is a small mill town in the southern part of western Washington. It has a population of but a few hundred. Close by is Lake river, and on its east bank is located the respondent’s sawmill. About three hundred feet to the north of the mill is appellant’s property. It is a farm of some ten or twelve acres, mostly in cultivation, and has a small dwelling where appellant and his family reside. The mill was…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Baltimore & Potomac Railroad v. Fifth Baptist ChurchSupreme Court of the United States · 1883
  2. Patrick v. SmithWashington Supreme Court · 1913
  3. Smith v. St. Paul, Minneapolis & Manitoba Railway Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1905
  4. Farnandis v. Great Northern Railway Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1906
  5. Hardin v. Olympic Portland Cement Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1916

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by26 opinions

  1. Taylor v. City of CincinnatiOhio Supreme Court · 1944
  2. Hindman v. Texas Lime CompanyTexas Supreme Court · 1957
  3. Tiegs v. WattsWashington Supreme Court · 1998
  4. Tiegs v. WattsWashington Supreme Court · 1998
  5. Steele v. Queen City Broadcasting Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1959

21 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