Bently v. Port Townsend Hotel & Improvement Co.
This text of 32 P. 1072 (Bently v. Port Townsend Hotel & Improvement Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Washington Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Motion is made in this case to dismiss the appeal, and to strike the pretended statement of facts from the record for the reason that it was not filed or settled in time; that it was not certified as required by law; that it does not contain the evidence given on the trial, and that notice of its settlement was not sufficient nor in time to give the court jurisdiction to settle it.
This case falls within the rule laid down by this court in Stenger v. Roeder, 3 Wash. 412 (28 Pac. Rep. 748); also Enos v. Wilcox, 3 [297]*297Wash. 44 (28 Pac. Rep. 364); Snyder v. Kelso, 3 Wash. 181 (28 Pac. Rep. 335).
The motion will be sustained, the statement of facts stricken, the appeal dismissed and the judgment of the lower court affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
32 P. 1072, 6 Wash. 296, 1893 Wash. LEXIS 283, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bently-v-port-townsend-hotel-improvement-co-wash-1893.