Willis v. Building Service Employees International Union, Local 262

Washington Supreme Court

Willis v. Building Service Employees International Union, Local 262

396 P.2d 884, 65 Wash. 2d 947, 1964 Wash. LEXIS 574

CourtWashington Supreme Court

DecidedNovember 25, 1964

DocketNo. 37363

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 396 P.2d 884 (Willis v. Building Service Employees International Union, Local 262) 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

Willis v. Building Service Employees International Union, Local 262, 396 P.2d 884, 65 Wash. 2d 947, 1964 Wash. LEXIS 574 (Wash. 1964).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Appellants appeal from an order enjoining them from picketing respondents’ place of business. Appellants’ counsel concedes that if the findings of fact entered by the trial court find substantial support in the evidence the appeal fails. Thorndike v. Hesperian Orchards, Inc., 54 Wn. (2d) 570, 343 P. (2d) 183 (1959). No question of law is presented or urged.

We have carefully reviewed the testimony contained in the statement of facts. While there is testimony supporting the contentions of both sides, the trial court accepted the testimony presented by respondents which, in turn, supports the findings of fact to which error is assigned. Since we do not retry disputed issues of fact upon appeal, the judgment of the trial court must be affirmed.

Respondents will recover their costs.

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

Per Curiam.

Appellants appeal from an order enjoining them from picketing respondents’ place of business. Appellants’ counsel concedes that if the findings of fact entered by the trial court find substantial support in the evidence the appeal fails. Thorndike v. Hesperian Orchards, Inc., 54 Wn. (2d) 570, 343 P. (2d) 183 (1959). No question of law is presented or urged.

We have carefully reviewed the testimony contained in the statement of facts. While there is testimony supporting the contentions of both sides, the trial court accepted the testimony presented by respondents which, in turn, supports the findings of fact to which error is assigned. Since we do not retry disputed issues of fact upon appeal, the judgment of the trial court must be affirmed.

Respondents will recover their costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

396 P.2d 884, 65 Wash. 2d 947, 1964 Wash. LEXIS 574, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/willis-v-building-service-employees-international-union-local-262-wash-1964.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack