Puget Sound Sav. & Loan Ass'n v. Erickson

• Decision Date: 13 April 1926
• Docket Number: 19558.
• Citation: Puget Sound Sav. & Loan Ass'n v. Erickson, 244 P. 972, 138 Wash. 578 (Wash. 1926)
• Court: Washington Supreme Court
• Parties: PUGET SOUND SAVINGS & LOAN ASS'N v. ERICKSON et al.

244 P. 972

138 Wash. 578

PUGET SOUND SAVINGS & LOAN ASS'N v. ERICKSON et al.

No. 19558.

Supreme Court of Washington

April 13, 1926

Department 2.

Appeal from Superior Court, King County; McCroskey, Judge.

Action by the Puget Sound Savings & Loan Association against Charles J. Erickson, the United States Spruce Production Corporation and others. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant last named appeals. Appeal dismissed.

John A. Frater, of Seattle, and Carey & Kerr and Omar C. Spencer, all of Portland, Or., for appellant.

Shank Belt & Fairbrook, of Seattle, for respondent.

MITCHELL J.

This action was brought to foreclose real estate mortgages by the Puget Sound Savings & Loan Association, a corporation against Charles J. Erickson and Anna E. Erickson, his wife B. H. Nazarena and Jane Doe Nazarena, his wife, United States Fidelity & Guaranty Company, a corporation, and United States Spruce Production Corporation, a corporation, defendants. The mortgages were given to the plaintiff by Erickson and wife. The complaint contained the usual and ordinary allegation that the defendants claimed some right, title, or interest in, or lien upon, the mortgaged premises, but whatever each or all have is subsequent and inferior to the liens of plaintiff's mortgages. An order of default was entered against Erickson and wife and the United States Fidelity & Guaranty Company, a corporation, who, though served with process, made no appearance in the case. B. H. Nazarena and wife made and filed an answer denying generally the essential averments of the complaint and setting up their claim to the property which they alleged was superior to the liens of plaintiff's mortgages. The United States Spruce Production Corporation, a corporation, appearing separately, made a similar answer. All of the answering defendants took part in the trial, and had incorporated in the judgment their separate and several exception to the judgment, which was signed and entered on April 16, 1925. Formal findings of fact and conclusions of law were made and entered. The judgment, in the usual form, foreclosed the mortgages and ordered the property sold at sheriff's sale for the amount declared to be due to the plaintiff and further ordered that----

'By the sales each and all of the said defendants be foreclosed of all right, title, or interest in or lien or claim upon said premises and each and every part thereof, subject only to the right of redemption provided by law.'

On July 2, 1925, the United States Spruce Corporation, a corporation, served upon the attorneys for the plaintiff, and filed in the cause, its notice of appeal from the whole of the judgment. The notice of appeal was not served on Nazarena or his wife or their attorney. Neither party to the action gave notice of appeal in open court at the time of the signing and entry of the judgment.

The respondent has moved to dismiss the appeal on account of the failure of the appellant to serve or cause to be served its notice of appeal on appellant's codefendants Nazarena and wife or their attorney of record.

In Robertson Mortgage Co. v. Thomas, 115 P. 312, 63 Wash. 316, discussing the necessity for serving notice of appeal upon a party to the...