State ex rel. Scottish American Mortgage Co. v. Meacham

50 P. 52, 17 Wash. 429, 1897 Wash. LEXIS 260
CourtWashington Supreme Court
DecidedJuly 29, 1897
DocketNo. 2537
StatusPublished
Cited by13 cases

This text of 50 P. 52 (State ex rel. Scottish American Mortgage Co. v. Meacham) 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
State ex rel. Scottish American Mortgage Co. v. Meacham, 50 P. 52, 17 Wash. 429, 1897 Wash. LEXIS 260 (Wash. 1897).

Opinion

Tbe opinion of tbe court was delivered by

Reavis, J.

Respondent commenced an action in tbe superior court of King county against tbe appellant as city treasurer of Seattle for mandamus to compel tbe latter to accept a certain sum named in full payment for certain street grade assessments and taxes assessed upon certain property in tbe city. Respondent alleged tbat it bad tendered tbe necessary money to tbe city treasurer to redeem [430]*430certain property which, had theretofore been bid in by the city for delinquent taxes, under the terms of an ordinance of said city for redemption of such property. The city treasurer refused to accept the money for redemption, because the. certificate of purchase held by the city had been sold and assigned under the terms of ordinance bio. 3937 of the city to one William B. Taylor; and a tax deed had issued to Taylor, and the amount tendered by relator for redemption was less than the sum due to Taylor. Respondent demurred to the answer of appellant and the demurrer was sustained by the superior court. But there is a supplemental record filed here by respondent which shows that Taylor, the real party in interest, has settled the controversy with respondent, and that there is now no real controversy existing in this cause.

This state of facts disposes of the appeal. Courts will not hear and determine abstract questions of law; neither can this court permit a mere question of costs in a cause to be litigated here.

The appeal is dismissed.

Scott, C. J., and Anders, Gordon and Dunbar, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Ellern v. Superior Court
160 P.2d 639 (Washington Supreme Court, 1945)
Maxham v. Berne
152 P. 673 (Washington Supreme Court, 1915)
Barber Asphalt Paving Co. v. Hamilton
141 P. 199 (Washington Supreme Court, 1914)
Vollman v. Industrial Workers of the World
140 P. 337 (Washington Supreme Court, 1914)
Wilson v. Fraser
121 P. 829 (Washington Supreme Court, 1912)
Tabor v. Hipp
70 S.E. 886 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1911)
Smith v. Palmer
80 P. 460 (Washington Supreme Court, 1905)
Trumbull v. Jefferson County
79 P. 1105 (Washington Supreme Court, 1905)
Lamona v. Odessa State Bank
76 P. 534 (Washington Supreme Court, 1904)
State ex rel. Land v. Christopher
72 P. 709 (Washington Supreme Court, 1903)
Betts v. State ex rel. Jorgensen
93 N.W. 167 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1903)
Sether v. Clark
63 P. 1106 (Washington Supreme Court, 1901)
Moores v. Moores
59 P. 327 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1899)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
50 P. 52, 17 Wash. 429, 1897 Wash. LEXIS 260, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-scottish-american-mortgage-co-v-meacham-wash-1897.