Legal Opinion

Nestegard v. Investment Exchange Corp.

Court of Appeals of Washington

Decided October 18, 1971No. 703-1PublishedCited by 20 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHorowitz, C.J.

The controlling question presented by plaintiffs’ motion to dismiss defendant’s appeal is whether the judgment appealed from, purporting to forfeit a real estate contract and to grant incidental relief, is appealable under CARO A 14(1) as a “final judgment.” We hold that the judgment appealed from is not such a final judgment.

Plaintiffs Nestegard, as vendors, entered into a real estate contract with the defendant Investment Exchange Corporation for the sale to it of land situated in King County, Washington. The contract price was $60,000, $15,000 down and the balance payable in monthly…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Beebe v. RussellSupreme Court of the United States · 1857
  2. In Re the Dissolution & Disorganization of Horse Heaven Irrigation DistrictWashington Supreme Court · 1941
  3. Werner v. RiemerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1949
  4. Felton v. Menan Starch Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1965
  5. In Re RalphCalifornia Supreme Court · 1946

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

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. Peters v. SimmonsWashington Supreme Court · 1976
  2. State v. SponburghWashington Supreme Court · 1974
  3. Seidler v. HansenCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1976
  4. Kemmer v. KeiskiCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2003
  5. Kemmer v. KeiskiCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2003

15 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