State v. Superior Court for King County, 22931.
| Decision Date | 30 April 1931 |
| Docket Number | 22931. |
| Citation | 162 Wash. 377,298 P. 716 |
| Parties | STATE ex rel. CANADIAN BANK OF COMMERCE v. SUPERIOR COURT FOR KING COUNTY et al. |
| Court | Washington Supreme Court |
Original prohibition proceeding by the State, on the relation of the Canadian Bank of Commerce, a corporation, against the Superior Court for King County, Hon. Calvin S. Hall, Judge and others, to obtain writ commanding respondents to refrain from further proceedings in an action by Capp & Taylor partners, against the relator and another.
Writ denied.
Bronson Jones & Bronson, of Seattle, for relator.
McClure & McClure and Walter S. Osborn, all of Seattle, for respondents.
This is an original proceeding in which the relator seeks a writ of prohibition. From the application and the return to the alternative writ, the following situation appears: Capp and the Taylors, partners as Capp & Taylor, commenced an action in the superior court for King county against the relator and the trustee in bankruptcy of the Straits Packing Company being cause No. 236307 in that court, wherein they sought to foreclose a statutory lien claimed by them under a statute of Alaska upon a lot of canned salmon put up by the packing company in Alaska and now in the possession of the defendant bank. No money judgment is sought.
The plaintiffs in that action alleged that they had caught and delivered to the packing company a part of the salmon that had gone into the pack; that they had not been paid in full; that by a certain statute of Alaska, set out in full in the complaint, they were given a lien upon the packed fish; that they had kept their lien alive by complying with the statute; that the packing company had shipped the entire pack to Seattle and delivered it to the bank; and that the latter now holds the packed fish in the city of Seattle in King county.
The bank demurred to the complaint on the ground that the court had no jurisdiction of the subject-matter. The demurrer was overruled after presentation of the issue to Judge Hall. Then followed the application to this court for a writ of prohibition commanding the superior court and Judge Hall to refrain from further proceedings in that action for want of jurisdiction.
The relator contends here that the complaint in the action in the superior court discloses that the plaintiffs have no lien which is enforceable in this state under the rules of comity.
This contention is all that is urged...
To continue reading
Request your trial