From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Shoemaker v. White-Dulaney Co.

The Supreme Court of Washington
Feb 6, 1925
232 P. 695 (Wash. 1925)

Summary

In Shoemaker v. White-Dulaney Co., 131 Wn. 347, 230 P. 162, 232 P. 695, on which the appellant relies, it will be noted that the marshaling took place at the instance of a junior mortgagee.

Summary of this case from Wenatchee Prod. Cr. Ass'n v. Pacific Etc. Co.

Opinion

No. 18557. En Banc.

February 6, 1925.

Appeal from a judgment of the superior court for Spokane county, Lindsley, J., entered November 3, 1923, upon findings in favor of the defendants, dismissing an action for equitable relief, tried to the court. Affirmed in part and reversed in part.

Driscoll Horrigan, for appellant.

Vorhees Canfield and Hamblen Gilbert, for respondent.


ON REHEARING.


Upon a rehearing En Banc, the court adhere to the Departmental opinion heretofore filed herein and reported in 131 Wn. 347, 230 P. 162.

The disposition there directed is therefore the order of this court.


Summaries of

Shoemaker v. White-Dulaney Co.

The Supreme Court of Washington
Feb 6, 1925
232 P. 695 (Wash. 1925)

In Shoemaker v. White-Dulaney Co., 131 Wn. 347, 230 P. 162, 232 P. 695, on which the appellant relies, it will be noted that the marshaling took place at the instance of a junior mortgagee.

Summary of this case from Wenatchee Prod. Cr. Ass'n v. Pacific Etc. Co.
Case details for

Shoemaker v. White-Dulaney Co.

Case Details

Full title:C.B. SHOEMAKER, Appellant, v. WHITE-DULANEY COMPANY et al., Respondents

Court:The Supreme Court of Washington

Date published: Feb 6, 1925

Citations

232 P. 695 (Wash. 1925)
232 P. 695
132 Wash. 699

Citing Cases

Wenatchee Prod. Cr. Ass'n v. Pacific Etc. Co.

[4] Furthermore, Pacific Fruit could have no right to demand a marshaling of the assets unless it had a…

Nohrnberg v. Boley

(37 Cyc 385; Penninger Lateral Co. v. Clark, 22 Idaho 397, 126 Pac. 524.) In equity, Moorman should be…