Washington Supreme Court, 1933

Mercer v. Lovering

Mercer v. Lovering
Washington Supreme Court · Decided March 10, 1933 · Holcomb
19 P.2d 936; 172 Wash. 700; 1933 Wash. LEXIS 797 (Pacific Reporter, Second Series)

Mercer v. Lovering

Dissenting Opinion

Holcomb, J.

(dissenting) — For the reason stated in my dissent in the Fawcett case, to which views I adhere, I dissent

Main, Mitchell, and Millard, JJ., concur with Holcomb, J.

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam.

This is a companion case to Fawcett v. Manny, ante p. 212. The two cases were heard and decided at the same time, 170 Wash. 148, 15 P. (2d) 933, and 170 Wash. 140, 15 P. (2d) 933, and a rehearing was granted in each ease thereafter. After the rehearing was granted, this case was compromised and settled, and a stipulation filed in this court for the dismissal of the appeal without costs.

In the light of this disposition of the case by the parties, and in view of the results finally reached in the case of Fawcett v. Manny, ante p. 212, the opinion of this court heretofore filed in this case, 170 Wash. 140, 15 P. (2d) 930, will be held for naught and disregarded for any and all purposes.

The last and final opinion in the case of Fawcett v. Manny, supra, will he considered as the expression of this court upon the questions of law which were involved in this ease.

In accordance with the stipulation, the appeal is dismissed without costs to either party, and the former opinion is set aside and vacated.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.