Upload a complaint or brief to quickly find on-point case law.
CARA A.I. uses the facts and legal issues in your document to find relevant authorities.
Drag a complaint or brief hereUpload a complaint or briefPDF documentWORD documentTXT documentOr, choose a document to uploadChoose DocumentSecure
Find on-point cases faster with CARA A.I.
Β§

Union Mach. Supply Co. v. TAYLOR-M.L. Co.

143 Wn. 154 (Wash. 1927)
Depth of Treatment
Newest to Oldest
Oldest to Newest
Cite Count
Union Mach. Supply Co. v. TAYLOR-M.L. Co.

2 Citing cases

  1. Losh Family, LLC v. Kertsman

    155 Wn. App. 458 (Wash. Ct. App. 2010)   Cited 12 times
    In Losh Family, Division One of this court held that a lease was invalid under the statute of frauds because the legal description "did not specify the particular plat or addition."

    We disagree. ΒΆ10 This is not a case like Union Machinery Supply Co. v. Taylor-Morrison Logging Co., 143 Wash. 154, 254 P. 1094 (1927), relied on by Grover. In Union Machinery, the officers of a logging company had signed a promissory note in their official capacities.

  2. Goldberg Family Inv. Corp. v. Quigg

    No. 44915-3-II (Wash. Ct. App. Oct. 28, 2014)   Cited 1 times

    As such, the parties bound to arbitrate by the Quiggs' signatures on these agreements are the Quiggs' corporate principals, not the Quiggs individually. Union Mach. & Supply Co. v. Taylor-Morrison Logging Co., 143 Wash. 154,157-62, 254 P.2d 1094 (1927) (collecting cases). However, the federal courts have held that, under "'common law principles of contract and agency law,'" a nonsignatory may consent to arbitrate a dispute "under ... five distinct theories."