Legal Opinion

Sisson v. Harvey

Washington Supreme Court

Decided February 23, 1923No. 17771PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Per curiam

The appeal bond in this case was not given by the appellants to the adverse party to the judgment and is therefore ineffectual. Bruhn v. Steffins, 66 Wash. 144, 199 Pac. 29. The situation is unfortunately such that an amended bond cannot be filed, and the benefit of § 1730-9, Rem. Comp. Stat. is not available. Mogelberg v. Calhoun, 94 Wash. 662, 163 Pac. 29; Salvino v. Taylor Mill Co., 102 Wash. 507, 173 Pac. 433; Den Bleyker v. King County, 108 Wash. 687, 185 Pac. 613.

For that reason the appeal must be dismissed.

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Katz v. JuddWashington Supreme Court · 1919
  2. Mogelberg v. CalhounWashington Supreme Court · 1917
  3. Bruhn v. SteffinsWashington Supreme Court · 1911
  4. Alden v. Superior Court of L.A. Cty.California Supreme Court · 1921
  5. Den Bleyker v. King CountyWashington Supreme Court · 1919

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Olmstead v. McClearyWashington Supreme Court · 1924
  2. Richmond v. WilliamsonWashington Supreme Court · 1943

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

Powered by the Exa API