Knight v. Bishop

Decision Date29 November 1957
Docket NumberNo. 34341,34341
Citation51 Wn.2d 353,318 P.2d 323
CourtWashington Supreme Court
PartiesRaymond E. KNIGHT, Respondent, v. Ed BISHOP and Jane Doe Bishop, his wife, doing business as Federal Discount Company, Appellants.

Bennett Hoffman, Seattle, for appellants.

Rummens, Griffin, Short & Cressman, R. M. Oswald, Seattle, for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

This action for damages arises out of a wrongful garnishment. The court entered findings of fact, conclusions of law, and judgment in favor of the plaintiff. The defendants appeal.

Appellants do not assign error to the findings of fact. They therefore become the established facts of the case. Rule on Appeal 43, 34A Wash.2d 47, as amended, effective January 2, 1953.

The question is, do the findings support the judgment? In re Youngkin's Estate, 1956, 48 Wash.2d 432, 294 P.2d 426; Union Electric & Plumbing Supply v. United Association of Journeymen and Apprentices of the Plumbing and Pipe Fitting Industry of The United States and Canada, Local Union 32, 1954, 45 Wash.2d 17, 272 P.2d 144.

The court found, in findings Nos. 8, 9, and 10, that the writ of garnishment which was served upon the garnishee defendant was wrongfully issued, for the reason that the judgment which was the basis for the writ of garnishment was void. The court entered judgment awarding damages for the amount it determined to be reasonable to reimburse the respondent for attorney's fees and costs expended in quashing the writ. Where, as here, the writ of garnishment is regular on its face, such items are proper elements of damage. Maib v. Maryland Casualty Co., 1943, 17 Wash.2d 47, 135 P.2d 71; Olsen v. National Grocery Co., 1942, 15 Wash.2d 164, 130 P.2d 78. The findings support the judgment.

The judgment is affirmed.

To continue reading

Request your trial
2 cases
  • Goodman v. Bethel School Dist. No. 403
    • United States
    • Washington Supreme Court
    • 25 Julio 1974
    ...conclusions of law are supported by the findings of fact. Browning v. Browning, 46 Wash.2d 538, 283 P.2d 125 (1955); Knight v. Bishop, 51 Wash.2d 353, 318 P.2d 323 (1957); Ebenezer A.M.E. Zion Church v. Corporate Loan & Sec. Co., 72 Wash.2d 128, 432 P.2d 291 The pertinent unchallenged findi......
  • State v. Laws, 34198
    • United States
    • Washington Supreme Court
    • 29 Noviembre 1957

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT