Case ID: wash_150/html/0510-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Main, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

[No. 21402.
    Department Two.
    January 11, 1929.]
    A. J. Mahan, Respondent, v. O. H. Springer et al., Appellants.
      
    
    
      J. E. Stone, for appellants.
    
      W. H. Sibbald, for respondent.
    
      
      Reported in 273 Pac. 533.
    
   Main, J.

By amended complaint, in this case, the plaintiff sought to recover damages because the defendant O. H. Springer had failed to construct a building in accordance with the contract, plans and specific-cations. The defendants, in their answer, denied failure to properly construct the building, and by cross-complaint Springer and wife sought a judgment against the plaintiff for the balance due upon the building contract.

The cause was tried to the court without a jury and resulted in a judgment in favor of the plaintiff in the sum of one thousand dollars, from which the defendants appeal.

No findings of fact or conclusions of law were made by the trial court. The case made by the amended complaint was one of law, as was the case made by the cross-complaint. Upon the trial no facts were developed which made the case other than purely one at law.

In an action at law, tried to the court upon the merits upon issues of fact, findings of fact are necessary to support the judgment. Colvin v. Clark, 83 Wash. 376, 145 Pac. 419; Western Dry Goods Co. v. Hamilton, 86 Wash. 478, 150 Pac. 1171; Boe v. Hodgson-Graham Co., 97 Wash. 444, 166 Pac. 779; State ex rel. Howland v. Olympia Veneer Co., 131 Wash. 209, 229 Pac. 529; State ex rel. Dunn v. Plese, 134 Wash. 443, 235 Pac. 961.

The judgment will he reversed and the cause remanded with direction to the superior court to follow the procedure suggested in the case of Colvin v. Clark, supra, and the other eases cited which follow that case.

Fullerton, C. J., French, and Parker, JJ., concur.