Legal Opinion

Dunn v. Peterson

Washington Supreme Court

Decided April 18, 1892No. 436PublishedCited by 2 opinions

Appeal from Superior Court, King County. The facts in this case are stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the Court

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Hoyt, J. —

This is substantially an action of ejectment. From the complaint it appears that plaintiff is the sole devisee of the owner of an undivided one-half of the land therein described; and that thewill under which sheelaims had been recently admitted to probate, as a foreign will, in the county in which such land is situated. In the paragraph relating to the probating of such will there is no allegation that letters testamentary or of administration with will annexed were not issued, nor is such fact anywhere alleged in said complaint. Under these…

Also in this document: Concurrence.

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Meeks v. HahnCalifornia Supreme Court · 1862
  2. Meeks v. KirbyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1873

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Griffin v. WarburtonWashington Supreme Court · 1900
  2. Hazelton v. BogardusWashington Supreme Court · 1894

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API