Legal Opinion

Lilly v. Eklund

Washington Supreme Court

Decided March 22, 1905No. 5402PublishedCited by 10 opinions

Appeal from a judgment of the superior court for Kitsap county, Denney, J., entered May 4, 1904, upon findings in favor of the plaintiff, after a trial on the merits before the court without a jury, quieting the title to real estate.

1Opinion of the CourtRoot, J.

This was an action to quiet title, and resulted

in a decree in favor of the respondent. The trial court made and filed separate findings of fact and conclusions of law. The only exception shown to have been taken to the findings is found in a minute in the clerk’s docket, as follows:

“Plaintiff, by his attorney, O. A. Riddle, now files findings of fact and conclusions of law and decree herein, to which defendants Oluf Eklund and Pauline Eklund, his wife, by their attorneys, Revelle & Revelle, except, and request thirty d%vs from May 4,1904, in which to file statement of facts. Allowed by the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Hannegan v. RothWashington Supreme Court · 1895
  2. Peters v. LewisWashington Supreme Court · 1903
  3. Schlotfeldt v. BullWashington Supreme Court · 1897
  4. Scoland v. ScolandWashington Supreme Court · 1892
  5. Cattell v. FergussonWashington Supreme Court · 1892

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Northern Life Insurance v. WalkerWashington Supreme Court · 1923
  2. Jones v. BardWashington Supreme Court · 1952
  3. Smith v. GlennWashington Supreme Court · 1905
  4. Bringgold v. BringgoldWashington Supreme Court · 1905
  5. Berens v. CoxWashington Supreme Court · 1912

5 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