W. T. Rawleigh Co. v. Graham
Washington Supreme Court
1DissentBlake, C. J.
(dissenting) — I dissent. As I understand it, the office of the motion for judgment non obstante veredicto does not extend to cases where it is necessary to make findings of fact to support the judgment. This is a law case, in which judgment, to be valid, must rest upon the verdict of a jury or upon findings of fact made and entered by the judge. In no such case are findings mere surplusage. They are essential to the validity of the judgment. Rem. Rev. Stat., § 367 [P. C. § 8486]; Colvin v. Clark, 83 Wash. 376, 145 Pac. 419; Kietz v. Gold Point Mines, 198 Wash. 112, 87 P. (2d) 277.
The force…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Colvin v. ClarkWashington Supreme Court · 1915
- Schroeder v. Hotel Commercial Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1915
- Kietz v. Gold Point Mines, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 1939
- Marion Steam Shovel Co. v. AukampWashington Supreme Court · 1933