State v. Bell

CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Washington
Writing for the CourtHADLEY, J.
Citation34 Wash. 185,75 P. 641
PartiesSTATE ex rel. JENSEN et ux. v. BELL, Judge, et al.
Decision Date29 February 1904

75 P. 641

34 Wash. 185

STATE ex rel. JENSEN et ux.
v.
BELL, Judge, et al.

Supreme Court of Washington

February 29, 1904


Original application by the state of Washington, on the relation of William Jensen and wife, against W. R. Bell, superior judge for King county, and another, for a writ of prohibition. Writ granted.

G. M. Emory and Harold Preston, for respondents.

HADLEY, J.

This is an original application in this court for a writ of prohibition directed to the superior court of King county and to the Honorable W. R. Bell, one of the judges thereof, and also to the Seattle Brewing & Malting Company, a corporation. An alternative writ was issued, and return thereto was made. The case presented here is as follows: On the 8th day of January, 1904, a cause was pending in the superior court, wherein the Seattle Brewing & Malting Company, one of the respondents here, was plaintiff, and the relators here were defendants. An application was made in that action by said plaintiff for the appointment of a receiver of a certain leasehold interest in controversy, and also for a temporary injunction against the said defendants. On the said 8th day of January the respondent Bell, as said judge, having heard the aforesaid application, orally announced his decision thereon. In the minutes of the court's proceedings made by the clerk on that day the following appears: [34 Wash. 187] 'Seattle Brewing & Malting Company vs. Wm. Jensen et ux. No. 41,455. Pl'ffs' mo. for appointment of receiver granted. Court enjoins the def'ts from selling any domestic beer except Rainier beer.--Supersedeas bond & bond on injunction fixed at $5,000 each. Ex. allowed.' Thereafter, on the 12th day of January, the said judge signed a formal order in the premises, and the same was spread upon the records of the court. Among other things contained in the order, the following appears touching the purchase and sale of beer other than Rainier beer: 'And it is hereby further [75 P. 642] ordered that the above defendants, William Jensen and Hulda Jensen, together with the attorneys, agents, servants, and employés of each of said defendants, and all persons claiming under, by, or through them, subsequent to the making of this order by the court on January 8, 1904, be, and they hereby are, restrained and enjoined from purchasing from any person whomsoever any beer, except beer imported from outside the limits of the United States of America, to be sold or offered for sale by said defendants, or either of them, in or about the carrying on of the saloon and restaurant business formerly and now operated in the premises referred to hereinabove; and it is further ordered that said defendants, William Jensen and Hulda Jensen, together with their attorneys, agents,...

To continue reading

Request your trial
11 practice notes
  • Mortimer v. Pacific States Sav. & Loan Co., 3395.
    • United States
    • Nevada Supreme Court of Nevada
    • February 3, 1944
    ...by it. The formal written order signed by the court, must, we think, supersede the minute order entered by the clerk. State v. Bell, 34 Wash. 185, 75 P. 641; Hanley v. Most, 9 Wash.2d 429, 115 P.2d 951, 118 P.2d 946; [145 P.2d 736] Gould v. Austin, 52 Wash. 457, 100 P. 1029, 1030. In the ab......
  • State ex rel. R.R. Com'n of Washington v. Oregon R. & Nav. Co.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Washington
    • April 9, 1912
    ...upon the railroad was the real and only order entered. Gould v. Austin, 52 Wash. 457, 459, 100 P. 1029; State ex rel. Jensen v. Bell, 34 Wash. 185, 75 P. 641. The statute by a necessary implication requires that all [68 Wash. 170] orders of the commission shall be in writing. It requires in......
  • Landry v. Seattle, P. A. & W. Ry. Co., 14290.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Washington
    • March 2, 1918
    ...judgment as entered is the judgment of the court irrespective of memorandum opinions or minute entries ( State ex rel. Jensen v. Bell, 34 Wash. 185, 75 P. 641; Gould v. Austin, 52 Wash. 457, 100 P. 1029; McGuire v. Bryant Lumber & Shingle Co., 53 Wash. 425, 102 P. 237; Michel v. White, ......
  • Silva v. Second Judicial Dist. Court in and for Washoe County, 3181
    • United States
    • Nevada Supreme Court of Nevada
    • April 5, 1937
    ...but judicial errors can be remedied only through a motion for a new trial or an appeal." The rulings in State ex rel. Jensen v. Bell, 34 Wash. 185, 75 P. 641, and McFadden v. McFadden, 22 Ariz. 246, 196 P. 452, relied on by respondents, are distinguishable from the question presented h......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
11 cases
  • Mortimer v. Pacific States Sav. & Loan Co., 3395.
    • United States
    • Nevada Supreme Court of Nevada
    • February 3, 1944
    ...by it. The formal written order signed by the court, must, we think, supersede the minute order entered by the clerk. State v. Bell, 34 Wash. 185, 75 P. 641; Hanley v. Most, 9 Wash.2d 429, 115 P.2d 951, 118 P.2d 946; [145 P.2d 736] Gould v. Austin, 52 Wash. 457, 100 P. 1029, 1030. In the ab......
  • State ex rel. R.R. Com'n of Washington v. Oregon R. & Nav. Co.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Washington
    • April 9, 1912
    ...upon the railroad was the real and only order entered. Gould v. Austin, 52 Wash. 457, 459, 100 P. 1029; State ex rel. Jensen v. Bell, 34 Wash. 185, 75 P. 641. The statute by a necessary implication requires that all [68 Wash. 170] orders of the commission shall be in writing. It requires in......
  • Landry v. Seattle, P. A. & W. Ry. Co., 14290.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Washington
    • March 2, 1918
    ...judgment as entered is the judgment of the court irrespective of memorandum opinions or minute entries ( State ex rel. Jensen v. Bell, 34 Wash. 185, 75 P. 641; Gould v. Austin, 52 Wash. 457, 100 P. 1029; McGuire v. Bryant Lumber & Shingle Co., 53 Wash. 425, 102 P. 237; Michel v. White, 64 W......
  • Silva v. Second Judicial Dist. Court in and for Washoe County, 3181
    • United States
    • Nevada Supreme Court of Nevada
    • April 5, 1937
    ...but judicial errors can be remedied only through a motion for a new trial or an appeal." The rulings in State ex rel. Jensen v. Bell, 34 Wash. 185, 75 P. 641, and McFadden v. McFadden, 22 Ariz. 246, 196 P. 452, relied on by respondents, are distinguishable from the question presented here. ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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