Mason v. Mason

435 P.3d 272, 192 Wash. 2d 1024
CourtWashington Supreme Court
DecidedMarch 6, 2019
DocketNo. 96438-6
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 435 P.3d 272 (Mason v. Mason) 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.

Bluebook
Mason v. Mason, 435 P.3d 272, 192 Wash. 2d 1024 (Wash. 2019).

Opinion

¶ 1 Department II of the Court, composed of Chief Justice Fairhurst and Justices Madsen, Stephens, González and Yu, considered at its March 5, 2019, Motion Calendar whether review should be granted pursuant to RAP 13.4(b) and unanimously agreed that the following order be entered.

¶ 2 IT IS ORDERED:

¶ 3 The petition for review is denied. The Petitioner's motion for extension of time to file a reply to the answer to the petition for review, motion for a continuance, and motion to accept the reply to the answer to the petition for review are all denied. The Respondent's motion to strike the reply to the answer to the petition for review and the Respondent's request for attorney fees are both denied.

For the Court

/s/ Fairhurst, CJ. CHIEF JUSTICE

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

Related

Tatyana Mason, V John Mason And Laurie Robertson
497 P.3d 431 (Court of Appeals of Washington, 2021)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
435 P.3d 272, 192 Wash. 2d 1024, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mason-v-mason-wash-2019.