Howe v. Helmick

Washington Supreme Court

Howe v. Helmick

335 P.2d 598, 53 Wash. 2d 829, 1959 Wash. LEXIS 350

Washington Supreme Court·Decided February 19, 1959·No. No. 34769·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The plaintiff brought this action for attorney fees. The defendants called for a jury. They have appealed from the judgment entered on the jury’s verdict.

Their single assignment of error is that the trial court erred in denying their motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict. No exceptions were taken to the instructions. The evidence is in conflict.

We are able to say that the record supports the verdict, and, accordingly, the judgment is affirmed.

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

Per Curiam.

The plaintiff brought this action for attorney fees. The defendants called for a jury. They have appealed from the judgment entered on the jury’s verdict.

Their single assignment of error is that the trial court erred in denying their motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict. No exceptions were taken to the instructions. The evidence is in conflict.

We are able to say that the record supports the verdict, and, accordingly, the judgment is affirmed.

Howe v. Helmick, 335 P.2d 598, 53 Wash. 2d 829, 1959 Wash. LEXIS 350 (Wash. 1959).

Pincite

335 P.2d 598 (Howe v. Helmick) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.