Dishman v. Whitney
| Citation | 124 Wash. 697,215 P. 71 |
| Decision Date | 03 May 1923 |
| Docket Number | 16793. |
| Parties | DISHMAN v. WHITNEY et al. |
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of Washington |
Appeal from Superior Court, King County; J. J. Renald, Judge.
On rehearing. Case dismissed.
For former opinion, see 209 P. 12.
Donworth, Todd & Higgins and Lundin & Barto, all of Seattle, for appellants.
Griffin & Griffin, of Seattle, for respondent.
After the department opinion in this case was filed (209 P. 12), a petition for rehearing was presented and granted. Before the time fixed for the rehearing en banc arrived the parties entered into a stipulation reciting that the judgment 'has been fully settled and satisfied, and that the appeal may be dismissed without costs to either party.' Notwithstanding the fact that the case, after the petition for rehearing had been granted, did not come on for hearing en banc, it should be noted that in the department opinion a reference is made to the holding in the case of Buckley v. Harkens, 114 Wash. 468, 195 P. 250, which is not entirely accurate. By filing this brief memorandum it is not the intention either to approve or disapprove the department opinion except in so far as that opinion was not accurate in its discussion of the case mentioned.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. McCollum, 28809.
...P. 12, 29 A.L.R. 460, questioned by Bourus v. Hagen, 192 Wash. 588, 591, 74 P.2d 205, as no longer an authority in view of Dishman v. Whitney, 124 Wash. 697, 215 P. 71. also, Mitchell v. Maytag-Pacific-Intermountain Co., 184 Wash. 342, 350, 51 P.2d 393, where we observed that for the reason......
-
State v. McCollum, 28809.
...29 A.L.R. 460, questioned by Bourus v. Hagen, 192 Wash. 588, 591, 74 P.2d 205, as no longer an authority in view of Dishman v. Whitney, 124 Wash. 697, 215 P. 71. See, also, Mitchell v. Maytag-Pacific-Intermountain Co., 184 Wash. 342, 350, 51 P.2d 393, where we observed that for the reasons ......
-
Kelsey Lane Homeowners Ass'n v. Kelsey Lane Co., Inc.
...Patent Scaffolding, 171 Wash. at 510, 18 P.2d 857 (citing Dishman v. Whitney, 121 Wash. 157, 162, 209 P. 12 (1922), modified, 124 Wash. 697, 215 P. 71 (1923)). 19. Uni-Com N.W., Ltd. v. Argus Publ'g Co., 47 Wash.App. 787, 796, 737 P.2d 304 (citing Bloedel Timberlands Dev., Inc. v. Timber In......
-
Kelsey Lane Homeowners Association v. Kelsey Lane Company, Inc., No. 53268-5-I (WA 1/10/2005), 53268-5-I
...P.2d 159 (1969)). 18. Patent Scaffolding, 171 Wash. at 510 (citing Dishman v. Whitney, 121 Wash. 157, 162, 209 P. 12 (1922), modified, 124 Wash. 697 19. Uni-Com N.W., Ltd. v. Argus Publ'g Co., 47 Wn. App. 787, 796, 737 P.2d 304 (citing Bloedel Timberlands Dev., Inc. v. Timber Indus., Inc., ......