Daniel v. Daniel
Citations
- 116 Wash. 82
- 198 P. 728
- 27 A.L.R. 177
- 1921 Wash. LEXIS 799
Syllabus
<p>Reference (2)—Compulsory Reference — Statutes — Validity. Rem. Code, § 369 et seq., expressly providing that a compulsory reference may be ordered by the trial court where the issues involve a long account on either side, does not contravene Const., Art. 4, §§ 1, 6, 23, creating courts, defining their jurisdiction, and providing for the appointment of court commissioners.</p> <p>Courts (2)—Jurisdiction—Nature and Source. Const., Art. 4, § 6, defining the jurisdiction of the superior courts, does not purport to control the manner in which such courts shall exercise jurisdiction, but this is left as a prerogative of the courts and of the lawmaking power, which can be lawfully exercised in any manner which the constitution does not directly prohibit.</p> <p>Account (7)—Defenses—Profits From Illegal Transactions. The fact that profits arising from the use of premises were derived largely from their lease for immoral purposes would not deprive a part owner of the premises of a right to an accounting after the transaction had been completed and closed, where such part owner had not been a party or privy to the illegal transaction.</p> <p>Same (14)—Evidence (75-77)—Secondary Evidence—Grounds for Admission—Failure to Keep Books. In an action for an accounting for moneys collected for plaintiff’s benefit and wrongfully withheld, defendant cannot complain of the indirect and circumstantial character of the evidence of moneys received, where he kept no books of account showing either the gross earnings of the property or the cost of its upkeep during the period of the accounting.</p> <p>Interest (5, 7)—Accounts—Unliquidated Demands. The rule that interest is not allowed upon unliquidated demands is inapplicable where a definite sum was collected by defendant during a term of years, of which sum plaintiff was entitled to a certain share: and it was proper for a referee, in stating the account by yearly ¡periods, to allow interest on the balances from the ■ end of each yearly
Judges: Fullerton
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
9 cases in this archive cite this case.
- State v. SponburghWashington Supreme Court· 1974-08-08· cited 33×
- State v. FranksCourt of Appeals of Washington· 2001-04-23· cited 21×
- State v. BarnesWashington Supreme Court· 2002-03-28· cited 15×
- Swan v. LandgrenCourt of Appeals of Washington· 1972-04-13· cited 13×
- United States v. American Theater Corporation and Richard Ottis BerryEighth Circuit· 1975-12-12· cited 9×
- Meier v. JohannsenSupreme Court of Iowa· 1951-05-08· cited 9×
- Harmon v. Pacific Telephone & Telegraph Co.California Court of Appeal· 1962-03-16· cited 8×
- Rosenfield v. VosperCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1943-03-11· cited 8×
- Tingstad v. National Bank of CommerceWashington Supreme Court· 1950-03-27
Cites
6 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Lindley v. McGlauflinWashington Supreme Court· 1910-03-04· cited 21×
- Stirtan v. BlethenWashington Supreme Court· 1914-03-27· cited 19×
- Daniel v. DanielWashington Supreme Court· 1919-05-12· cited 11×
- Poultry Producers' Union v. WilliamsWashington Supreme Court· 1910-03-28· cited 8×
- Modern Irrigation & Land Co. v. NeelyWashington Supreme Court· 1914-08-10· cited 7×
- Standard Furniture Co. v. Van AlstineWashington Supreme Court· 1903-04-03· cited 4×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.