Goulter v. Huse, 27301.
| Decision Date | 09 November 1938 |
| Docket Number | 27301. |
| Citation | 84 P.2d 126,196 Wash. 652 |
| Parties | GOULTER v. HUSE, Director of Department of Licenses. |
| Court | Washington Supreme Court |
Department 1.
Action by L. H. Goulter against Harry C. Huse, Director of the Department of Licenses, to require defendant to restore to plaintiff a motor vehicle operator's license which had been suspended for one year. From a judgment dismissing the action, plaintiff appeals.
Affirmed.
Appeal from Superior Court, Thurston County; John M. Wilson, judge.
Fred M Bond, of South Bend, for appellant.
G. W Hamilton and John E. Belcher, both of Olympia, for respondent.
L. H Goulter brought this action to require the state director of licenses to restore to him a motor vehicle operator's license which that officer had suspended for one year. The trial in the superior court resulted in a judgment denying the relief asked for and dismissing the action. From this judgment, Goulter appealed.
June 1 1938, the appellant was convicted in a justice court, in Pacific County, for having previously driven an automobile upon a public highway while under the influence of intoxicating liquor, and from the judgment of conviction and sentence he appealed to the superior court of that county. Thereafter the director of licenses suspended his operator's license for a period of one year. The present action was brought in Thurston county for the purpose of requiring the state director of licenses to vacate the suspension and restore the license.
The question is, as stated in the appellant's brief, whether the director had authority to suspend the operator's license after there had been an appeal from the judgment of conviction to the superior court.
* * *
* * *
Section 6312-66 provides that the director of licenses
'* * * may in his sound discretion immediately suspend the vehicle operator's license of any person whenever the director of licenses has reason to believe:
Section 6312-67 provides that every court '* * * having jurisdiction over any of the offenses committed under this act or any other act of this state regulating the operation of vehicles on any of the public highways, shall forward to the director of licenses a record of the conviction * * *.'
It will be observed that driving an automobile upon a public highway while under the influence of intoxicating liquor is an offense for which it is provided that the court shall revoke the operator's license, and the following section provides that the director, in his sound discretion, may suspend the vehicle operator's license whenever he has reason to believe that such person has committed any offense for which mandatory suspension or revocation of licenses is provided by law. The driving of an automobile upon a public highway while under the influence of intoxicating liquor is such an offense.
The appellant's argument appears to be based upon the hypothesis that, when the appeal was taken from the judgment of the justice of the peace to the superior court, that appeal 'annulled or wiped out' the judgment of the justice, and, for this reason, the director did not have the authority to revoke the license or suspend it because of the conviction and without having made an independent investigation...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Parker v. State Highway Dept.
...to be effected. The only decision which we have been able to find touching directly upon the question before us is Goulter v. Huse, 196 Wash. 652, 84 P.2d 126, 127. That case involved the construction of a Washington statute which authorized the Director of the Department of Licenses, in hi......
-
Maguire v. Fulton
...not be deemed a final conviction unless the judgment of the trial court is upheld by the appellate court.' Defendants cite Goulter v. Huse, 196 Wash. 652, 84 P.2d 126, which holds an appeal neither 'annuls or wipes out' a conviction in a trial court. It must be noted, however, that revocati......
-
City of Seattle v. Crockett, 44061
...rendered by the municipal court still exists and the appeal merely suspends operation of the judgment. JCrR 6.02; Goulter v. Huse, 196 Wash. 652, 84 P.2d 126 (1938). A trial de novo, such as in this case, represents the exrecise of the appellate jurisdiction of the superior court and not it......