McFadden v. Mountain View Mining & Milling Co.
67 P. 1134, 27 Wash. 729, 1902 Wash. LEXIS 449
Opinion
Motion is,made to dismiss the appeal in this case, for the reason that the sureties did not qualify, as provided by statute, and that there was no justification whatever by such sureties, as is provided by § 6509, Bal. Code. This case falls squarely within the rule announced in Northern Counties Investment Trust v. Hender, 12 Wash. 559 (41 Pac. 913); and the motion will therefore be sustained and the appeal dismissed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
McFadden v. Mountain View Mining & Milling Co., 67 P. 1134, 27 Wash. 729, 1902 Wash. LEXIS 449 (Wash. 1902).
67 P. 1134 (McFadden v. Mountain View Mining & Milling Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Mironski v. Noon
118 P. 735 (Washington Supreme Court, 1911)