Legal Opinion

Presidential Estates Apartment Associates v. Barrett

Washington Supreme Court

Decided May 30, 1996No. 63079-8PublishedCited by 45 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtAlexander, J.

— Relying on Civil Rule 60(a), which authorizes a trial court to correct a "clerical error,”1 the trial court entered an amended judgment, stating *322that the original judgment was in error to the extent it did not reflect its intention regarding two issues. The Court of Appeals reversed, concluding that the amended judgment did not remedy a clerical error, but instead dealt with what the Court of Appeals considered to be "judicial errors,” which are not correctable under CR 60(a). Thus, on review we must decide whether a trial court may, pursuant to CR 60(a), amend a judgment to reflect its…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Fay v. Northwest Airlines, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 1990
  2. O'Bryan v. American Investment & Improvement Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1908
  3. Marchel v. BungerCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1975
  4. In Re Kramer's EstateWashington Supreme Court · 1957
  5. Seattle-First National Bank v. TreiberCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1975

3Cited by45 opinions

  1. State v. ChapmanWashington Supreme Court · 2000
  2. State v. ChapmanWashington Supreme Court · 2000
  3. State v. TiliWashington Supreme Court · 2003
  4. State v. TiliWashington Supreme Court · 2003
  5. State v. VerharenWashington Supreme Court · 1998

40 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