Legal Opinion
Pietz v. Indermuehle
Court of Appeals of Washington
Decided February 27, 1998No. 20497-5-IIPublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
949 P.2d 449 (1998)
89 Wash.App. 503
Edward H. PIETZ, Appellant,
v.
Charles INDERMUEHLE and Ruth Indermuehle, Lamont Smith and Jane Doe Smith, Michael J. Wynne and Mary Wynne, Defendants,
Leslie E. Fordham and Virginia Fordham, Respondents.
No. 20497-5-II.
Court of Appeals of Washington, Division 2.
January 16, 1998.
As Amended on Clarification February 27, 1998.
James D. Hamilton, Vancouver, for Appellant.
Rodney E. Lewis, James S. Smith, Darleen Darnall, Davis Wright Tremaine, Portland, for Respondents.
SEINFELD, Judge.
The trial court summarily dismissed Edward Pietz's action against his former…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- LaMon v. ButlerWashington Supreme Court · 1989
- Sherman v. StateWashington Supreme Court · 1995
- Sherman v. StateWashington Supreme Court · 1995
- Goodman v. GoodmanWashington Supreme Court · 1995
- Miller v. U.S. BankCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1994
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Hudson v. CondonCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2000
- Hudson v. CondonCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2000
- Veith v. Xterra Wetsuits, LLCCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2008
- Peerless Division, Lear Siegler, Inc. v. United States Special Hydraulic Cylinders Corp.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1999
- Beck v. Farmers InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2002
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.