Case ID: wash_89/html/0426-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Bausman, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

[No. 12885.
    Department Two.
    January 28, 1916.]
    Harry Folmsbee et al., Appellants, v. William E. Daniell et al., Respondents.
      
    
    Appeal — Review—Findings. A finding upon conflicting evidence, in an action at law tried to the court, will not be reversed on appeal where there is no preponderance of the evidence against it.
    Appeal from a judgment of the superior court for Okanogan county, Pendergast, J., entered November 11,1913, upon findings in favor of the defendants, in an action in tort.
    Affirmed.
    
      Geo. S. Lee and Smith & Gresham, for appellants.
    
      Chas. A. Johnson, for respondents.
    
      
       Reported in 154 Pac. 796.
    
   Bausman, J.

Action in deceit for damages, tried without a jury. The real question here is whether an erased clause was stricken from a contract before it was signed. The appellants claim that it was not. Upon this, the sole point that we find it necessary to review, the lower court made an express finding against them.

There being conflicting evidence and no preponderance against this finding, our decision is controlled by our own numerous and recent utterances.

We shall not review the finding, and the judgment is affirmed.

Morris, C. J., Main, Parker, and Holcomb, JJ., concur.