Legal Opinion

Lidral Construction Co., Inc. v. Parker

Washington Supreme Court

Decided June 5, 1941No. 28121PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Steinert, J. —

This is an action to recover the balance alleged to be due upon a building contract, and to foreclose a contractor’s lien for the amount of such claim. A demurrer to plaintiff’s fourth amended complaint was sustained, and, plaintiff having elected to stand upon that pleading, the trial court entered judgment of dismissal of the action. Plaintiff appealed.

The question before us is whether or not the fourth amended complaint, hereinafter referred to simply as the complaint, stated a cause of action.

The allegations of the complaint will be set forth, in part, according to their…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Isaacs v. HollandWashington Supreme Court · 1892
  2. Bjorklund v. Continental Casualty Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1931
  3. Ankeny v. Pomeroy Grain Growers, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 1932
  4. Johnson v. BergWashington Supreme Court · 1929
  5. Adams v. AdamsWashington Supreme Court · 1935

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. McMahan v. Mutual Benefit Health & Accident Ass'nWashington Supreme Court · 1947
  2. Metropolitan Park District v. Olympia Athletic Club, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 1953
  3. Cotton v. Morck Hotel Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1949
  4. Ikola v. Snoqualmie Falls Lumber Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1942
  5. Allen v. Office Employees' International UnionWashington Supreme Court · 1958

3 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