Case Name: The State of Washington, on the Relation of George Bradley, Prosecuting Attorney, Respondent, v. P. E. Berry et al., Appellants
Court: Washington Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Washington
Decision Date: 1895-11-11
Citations: 13 Wash. 708
Docket Number: No. 1932
Parties: The State of Washington, on the Relation of George Bradley, Prosecuting Attorney, Respondent, v. P. E. Berry et al., Appellants.
Judges: 
Reporter: Washington Reports
Volume: 13
Pages: 708–708

Head Matter:
[No. 1932.
Decided November 11, 1895.]
The State of Washington, on the Relation of George Bradley, Prosecuting Attorney, Respondent, v. P. E. Berry et al., Appellants.
Appeal from Superior Court, Douglas County.—Hon. Wallace Mount, Judge.
Affirmed.
P. E. Berry, for appellants.
M. B. Malloy, for respondent.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
This is a proceeding in quo warranto, and involves the validity of the organization and existence of the town of Water-ville, as a municipal corporation. This is the only question presented, and as it has been heretofore expressly decided by this court in Pullman v. Hungate, 8 Wash. 519 (36 Pac. 483), and-subsequently affirmed in State ex. rel. Rice, v. Centralia, 8 Wash. 659 (36 Pac. 484), and Abernethy v. Medical Lake, 9 Wash. 112 (37 Pac. 306), and as we are satisfied therewith, we decline to enter upon any further discussion of the question, and affirm the judgment rendered in the lower court .herein.