From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Bills v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Company

The Supreme Court of Washington. Department One
Jul 19, 1962
373 P.2d 128 (Wash. 1962)

Opinion

No. 35941.

July 19, 1962.

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for King County, No. 526083, Henry W. Cramer, J., entered December 2, 1960. Affirmed.

Action on an insurance policy. Plaintiffs appeal from a judgment in favor of the defendant.

Koenigsberg Brown, by Leo M. Koenigsberg, for appellants.

A.T. Bateman (of Brethorst, Fowler, Bateman, Reed McClure), for respondent.



Appellants sued the respondent on a policy of voluntary compensation insurance to recover a thirty per cent permanent partial disability. While there are six assignments of error, one finding of fact disposes of the entire controversy.

The court found that the plaintiff (appellant) sustained no permanent partial disability as a result of the accident in question although there was evidence to the contrary. A physician of standing who examined Mrs. Bills testified that she did not have a permanent partial disability as a result of the accident. The finding is supported by substantial evidence.

Thorndike v. Hesperian Orchards, Inc., 54 Wn.2d 570, 343 P.2d 183, and subsequent cases, settle the law that we will not, on appeal, retry disputed questions of fact.

Affirmed.


Summaries of

Bills v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Company

The Supreme Court of Washington. Department One
Jul 19, 1962
373 P.2d 128 (Wash. 1962)
Case details for

Bills v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Company

Case Details

Full title:JOYCE BILLS et al., Appellants, v. LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY…

Court:The Supreme Court of Washington. Department One

Date published: Jul 19, 1962

Citations

373 P.2d 128 (Wash. 1962)
373 P.2d 128
60 Wash. 2d 898

Citing Cases

State v. Hudson

SAG at 9. We will not retry disputed questions of fact. Bills v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 60 Wn.2d 898, 373…

Benedict v. Department of Labor & Industries

Based on this provision, the right to retry issues of fact on appeal is denied by this court. Bills v.…