Case ID: wash_143/html/0700-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Per Curiam.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

[No. 19901.
    
      Bn Banc.
    
    April 21, 1927.]
    R. H. Hamm et al., Respondents, v. The City of Seattle, Appellant. 
      
    
    Appeal from a judgment of the superior court for King county, Jones, J., entered October 13, 1925, upon the verdict of a jury rendered in favor of the plaintiffs, in an action in tort.
    Affirmed.
    
      Thomas J. L. Kennedy and Arthur Schramm, for appellant.
    
      Frank S. Griffith and Jay O. Allen, for respondent.
    
      
      Reported in 255 Pac. 655.
    
   Per Curiam.

In view of our holding in Wong Kee Jun v. Seattle, ante p. 479, 255 Pac. 645, where we have adopted a rule different from’ that enunciated in Jorguson v. Seattle, 80 Wash. 126, 141 Pac. 334, the departmental decision herein reported in ( Hamm v. Seattle) 140 Wash. 427, 249 Pac. 778, is modified by striking therefrom the following language:

“The objection is sound. Kincaid v. Seattle, 74 Wash. 617, 134 Pac. 504, 135 Pac. 820; Jorguson v. Seattle, 80 Wash. 126, 141 Pac. 334.
“But we do not think reversal should necessarily follow. A statement of law inapplicable under the facts and pleadings, but which could in no wise prejudice or mislead the jury, cannot be considered reversible error.”

In all other respécts the opinion is affirmed.