From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Peterson v. Tacoma

The Supreme Court of Washington
Jun 15, 1926
246 P. 944 (Wash. 1926)

Opinion

No. 19294. En Banc.

June 15, 1926.

APPEAL (479) — DECISION — SCOPE OF RELIEF. Where there is no majority of the appellate judges in favor of a reversal of the judgment, it must be affirmed.

Appeal from a judgment of the superior court for Pierce county, Askren, J., entered January 3, 1925, in favor of the plaintiff, in an action to set aside a local assessment roll, tried to the court. Affirmed.

E.K. Murray, Leo Teats and Lorenzo Dow, for appellant.

Burkey Burkey, for respondents.


Askren, J., while a judge of the superior court, presided at the trial of this case below and entered the judgment appealed from. He therefore has taken no part here. The remaining judges are divided in their opinions and there is no majority, either for affirmance or reversal.

Therefore, there being no majority for the reversal of the judgment of the trial court, it necessarily stands affirmed, and the order of this court is that the judgment appealed from be, and it is hereby, affirmed.


Summaries of

Peterson v. Tacoma

The Supreme Court of Washington
Jun 15, 1926
246 P. 944 (Wash. 1926)
Case details for

Peterson v. Tacoma

Case Details

Full title:JOHN PETERSON et al., Respondents, v. THE CITY OF TACOMA, Appellant

Court:The Supreme Court of Washington

Date published: Jun 15, 1926

Citations

246 P. 944 (Wash. 1926)
246 P. 944
139 Wash. 313

Citing Cases

Serra v. National Bk. of Commerce

[1] The general rule is that a judgment or decree will be affirmed when an appellate court is equally divided…

City of Shoreline v. McLemore

However, we recognize this opinion has garnered only four signatures. "Therefore, there being no majority for…