Hall v. Skavdale
57 P. 807, 21 Wash. 203, 1899 Wash. LEXIS 260
Opinion
Motion is made to dismiss this action for want of jurisdiction on the part of this court to try the same. The case falls squarely within the rule announced in Pacific Supply Co. v. Brand, 7 Wash. 357 (35 Pac. 72), and the motion will therefore be sustained.
It is urged by appellant that no proper service of the motion has been made, but, this being a jurisdictional question, as has often been decided by this court, the motion will be entertained, even upon an oral suggestion at the time of the trial.
The appeal is therefore disinissed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Hall v. Skavdale, 57 P. 807, 21 Wash. 203, 1899 Wash. LEXIS 260 (Wash. 1899).
57 P. 807 (Hall v. Skavdale) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
State v. McCollum
136 P.2d 165 (Washington Supreme Court, 1943)
Rayburn v. Abrams
100 P. 751 (Washington Supreme Court, 1909)
Wilson v. Martin
86 P. 205 (Washington Supreme Court, 1906)
Macy v. Sullivan
84 P. 601 (Washington Supreme Court, 1906)
Woodward v. McConnaughey
106 F. 758 (Ninth Circuit, 1901)