Legal Opinion

Rugger v. Hammond

Washington Supreme Court

Decided February 24, 1917No. 13524PublishedCited by 15 opinions

Appeal from a judgment of the superior court for Pacific county, Rice, J., entered February 3, 1916, in favor of the plaintiff, upon an agreed statement of facts, in an action to recover a trust fund.

1Opinion of the Court

Parker, J. —

This action was originally commenced in the superior court for Pacific county by the plaintiff, Rugger, against the Raymond Trust Company, a banking eorpora*86tion, to recover the sum of $3,551.59, which he claims had been received by that company for him as the proceeds of the sale of certain local improvement bonds belonging to him. Thereafter the Raymond Trust Company became insolvent, when its property and affairs passed into the hands of the defendant, Hammond, as receiver for the benefit of its creditors, and thereafter the case proceeded to trial as against the receiver upon…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Holmes v. . GilmanNew York Court of Appeals · 1893
  2. Englar v. OffuttCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1889
  3. Carlson v. KiesWashington Supreme Court · 1913
  4. Bradley v. ChesebroughSupreme Court of Iowa · 1900
  5. Jones v. ChesebroughSupreme Court of Iowa · 1898

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

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Tucker v. BrownWashington Supreme Court · 1944
  2. Northwest Lumber Co. v. Scandinavian American BankWashington Supreme Court · 1924
  3. Spiroplos v. Scandinavian-American BankWashington Supreme Court · 1921
  4. Heidelbach v. CampbellWashington Supreme Court · 1917
  5. Smith v. FitchWashington Supreme Court · 1946

10 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