Bentley v. Western Union Telegraph Co.

172 P. 1172, 102 Wash. 433, 1918 Wash. LEXIS 945
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Bentley v. Western Union Telegraph Co.. Read the opinion of the Court — 98 Wash. 431
Washington Supreme Court·Decided May 11, 1918·No. No. 14039·Published

Opinion

On Rehearing.

Holcomb, J.

A rehearing En Banc was granted in this case from the decision heretofore made and reported in 98 Wash. 431, 167 Pac. 1127.

The facts at issue and the legal propositions involved are sufficiently stated in the former prevailing opinion and the dissenting opinion {herein, and no amplification is necessary now. For the reasons stated in the dissenting opinion, which the majority of the court now adopt as the correct view of the law and of [434] the disposition of the case, the former opinion is overruled and the verdict and judgment affirmed.

Ellis, C. J., Webster, Main, and Parker, JJ., concur.

Fullerton, Mount, and Chadwick, JJ., dissent.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Bentley v. Western Union Telegraph Co., 172 P. 1172, 102 Wash. 433, 1918 Wash. LEXIS 945 (Wash. 1918).

172 P. 1172 (Bentley v. Western Union Telegraph Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Bentley v. Western Union Telegraph Co.
167 P. 1127 (Washington Supreme Court, 1917)