Legal Opinion

Rosenkranz v. Guaranty Trust Co.

Washington Supreme Court

Decided February 2, 1931No. 22722. Department OnePublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHolcomb, J.

The amended complaint in this action alleges a cause of action in replevin, or for the redelivery of certain Grandview Irrigation District, Snipes Mountain Irrigation District and Yakima County Sub. 9 of Dist. No. 3 Drainage Improvement District bonds numbers 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10. The answer of appellants to the amended complaint consists of denials of the allegations of the amended complaint, and an affirmative defense and cross-complaint, setting forth copies of the bonds sought to be recovered and an allegation that all the bonds are negotiable bonds, purchased in good faith, and that…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. National Safe Deposit, Sav. & Trust Co. of DC v. HibbsSupreme Court of the United States · 1913
  2. Russell v. American Bell Telephone Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1902
  3. Scollans v. RollinsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1901
  4. County of King v. FerryWashington Supreme Court · 1893
  5. Linn v. ReidWashington Supreme Court · 1921

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Allen v. GraafWashington Supreme Court · 1934
  2. Fidelity Nat. Bank & Trust Co. of Kansas City v. McNealCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1933
  3. Fidelity Nat. Bank & Trust Co. v. McNealDistrict Court, N.D. Oklahoma · 1933

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

Powered by the Exa API