Siegley v. Nakata

Citations

• 101 Wash. 73
• 172 P. 203
• 1918 Wash. LEXIS 806

Syllabus

<p>Appeal—Statement op Facts—Time for Filing—Extension. An ■ex parte order extending the time for filing a statement of facts is void.</p> <p>Same—Statement of Facts—Notice of Extension of Time. Rem. Code, § 393, requiring notice of an application for an extension of time for filing a statement of facts requires “written” notice, and ■oral notice and stipulation that no objection would be filed does not work an estoppel.</p> <p>Judgment—Payment—Suit on Stay Bond—Effect of Dismissal. The dismissal of an action on a bond given to stay execution in a suit to vacate a judgment, merely releases the surety on the bond, and not the defendant independently and antecedently liable on the judgment, and does not operate as payment or prevent execution and sale under the judgment; and all that defendant can claim is that money paid for the discharge of the bond be credited on the judgment.</p> <p>Same — Parties Concluded — Privies. One who was a privy, though not a formal party, and whose attorney represented him in all the litigation relating to the quieting of title to certain land, is bound by a judgment in one of the suits, determining that the land was the separate property of a married woman who was a defendant in the suit.</p>