Crooks v. Georgetown Transfer Co.
Opinion
This is an appeal from an order of the trial court taxing costs in favor of the Georgetown Transfer Company, a corporation, in the second trial of an action the merits of which have been before this court on three different occasions, and are reported in 119 Wash. 154, 205 Pac. 419; 125 Wash. 563, 216 Pac. 869; and 130 Wash. 88, 226 Pac. 262.
At the outset we are met by a motion of respondent to dismiss the appeal. The motion must be granted.
We have held in a long line of decisions that this court will not take jurisdiction of a cause simply to determine who shall pay costs in the controversy. Smith v. Palmer, 38 Wash. 276, 80 Pac. 460; Wilson v. Fraser, 67 Wash. 347, 121 Pac. 829; White v. Stout, 72 Wash. 62, 121 Pac. 917; Vollman v. Industrial Workers of the World, 79 Wash. 192, 140 Pac. 337; Barber Asphalt Paving Co. v. Hamilton, 80 Wash. 51, 141 Pac. 199; State v. Furth, 82 Wash. 665, 144 Pac. 907; Carstens & Earles v. Seattle, 84 Wash. 88, 146 Pac. 381, Ann. Cas. 1917A 1070; Standard Fire Ins. *183 Co. v. Fishback, 86 Wash. 225, 145 Pac. 945; Holly-Mason Hardware Co. v. Schnatterly, 111 Wash. 29, 189 Pac. 545.
The appeal is therefore dismissed.
Tolman, C. J., Main, Bridges, and Parker, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
233 P. 1118 (Crooks v. Georgetown Transfer Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.