From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State ex Rel. Corbett v. Superior Court

The Supreme Court of Washington
Aug 31, 1935
48 P.2d 617 (Wash. 1935)

Opinion

No. 25681. Department Two.

August 31, 1935.

APPEAL AND ERROR (397) — REVIEW — PRESUMPTIONS — FINDINGS. Findings of fact being unnecessary in an equity case, every presumption will be indulged to support a decree, though the findings are insufficient.

SAME (389) — REVIEW — AMENDMENTS REGARDED AS MADE. In the absence of a statement of facts, pleadings are deemed amended to conform to the proof.

HOMESTEAD (7) — ACQUISITION AND ESTABLISHMENT — DECLARATION — GOOD FAITH. Good faith is essential to sustain a declaration of homestead.

Certiorari to review a judgment of the superior court for King county, Allen, J., entered March 2, 1935, denying a claim for homestead in an action to foreclose a mortgage. Affirmed.

H.E. Corbett, for relators.

Mifflin Mifflin, for respondents.


This case is here on certiorari. Relators were defendants in an action to foreclose a mortgage on certain real estate. They answered, setting up claim of homestead in the mortgaged property. The trial court entered a decree foreclosing the mortgage and denying relators' claim of homestead. The record here consists of the complaint, relators' answer and the decree, in which were included certain findings of fact.

[1] The case being of equitable cognizance, no findings of fact were necessary. Every presumption is indulged in support of the decree. When findings are made in such cases, the decree will be upheld, although the findings may be indefinite, uncertain or incomplete, it being presumed that the evidence was sufficient to sustain the decree. Thompson v. Emerson, 55 Wn. 138, 104 P. 201; Smith v. Dement Brothers Co., 100 Wn. 139, 170 P. 555. Even though findings of fact are inconsistent, if one or more supports the decree, it will be upheld. Howey v. Bingham, 14 Wn. 450, 44 P. 886; Silverstone v. Hanley, 55 Wn. 458, 104 P. 767.

[2] So, also, in the absence of a statement of facts, pleadings are deemed to be amended to conform to proof. Messick v. National Council, 103 Wn. 143, 173 P. 940.

[3] In the light of these rules, it is necessary to refer to only one of the court's findings:

"And the court further finds from the evidence herein that the defendants, Corbett, are not asserting said homestead exemption in good faith or entitled thereto and that to allow the same would be to permit of trafficking in homesteads and the court concludes that the homestead asserted by the defendants, Corbett, should be disallowed and denied and that the plaintiffs should be entitled to the immediate possession of said real property upon sale thereof under the foreclosure hereinafter decreed."

Under the rules stated, we are concluded by the finding, since it supports the decree denying relators' claim of homestead. For good faith in asserting the right is essential to sustain a declaration of homestead. Skinner v. Hunter, 95 Wn. 607, 164 P. 244; Traverso v. Cerini, 146 Wn. 273, 263 P. 184.

Decree affirmed.

TOLMAN, STEINERT, HOLCOMB, and MITCHELL, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

State ex Rel. Corbett v. Superior Court

The Supreme Court of Washington
Aug 31, 1935
48 P.2d 617 (Wash. 1935)
Case details for

State ex Rel. Corbett v. Superior Court

Case Details

Full title:THE STATE OF WASHINGTON, on the Relation of A.V. Corbett et al.…

Court:The Supreme Court of Washington

Date published: Aug 31, 1935

Citations

48 P.2d 617 (Wash. 1935)
48 P.2d 617
183 Wash. 373