Perkins v. Silver

169 P. 647, 99 Wash. 697, 1918 Wash. LEXIS 617
CourtWashington Supreme Court
DecidedJanuary 9, 1918
DocketNo. 14333
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 169 P. 647 (Perkins v. Silver) 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
Perkins v. Silver, 169 P. 647, 99 Wash. 697, 1918 Wash. LEXIS 617 (Wash. 1918).

Opinion

Parker, J.

The plaintiff, Perkins, seeks a judgment decreeing him to be the owner of a one-sixth interest in certain mining claims the legal title to which stands in the name of the defendants. Trial in the superior court upon the merits resulted in judgment dismissing the plaintiff’s complaint and decreeing him to have no interest in the mining claims. Prom this disposition of the. cause, the plaintiff has appealed.

A careful reading of the record convinces us that there is no question here presented worthy of serious consideration, other than a question of fact as to whether or not appellant has complied with the agreed conditions upon the performance of which he was to acquire his claimed interest in the mining claims. We think it would serve no useful purpose to discuss the facts in detail. The trial court’s conclusion rests upon conflicting oral evidence. We deem it sufficient to say that we cannot see our way clear to disturb the judgment. It is therefore affirmed.

Ellis, C. J., Pullebton, Main, and Websteb, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Fiegel v. First Nat. Bank of Kingfisher
1923 OK 112 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1923)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
169 P. 647, 99 Wash. 697, 1918 Wash. LEXIS 617, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/perkins-v-silver-wash-1918.