Case Name: Nathan Toklas et al., Plaintiffs, v. Geo. Wirtz et al., Defendants
Court: Washington Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Washington
Decision Date: 1901-12-19
Citations: 26 Wash. 702
Docket Number: No. 3714
Parties: Nathan Toklas et al., Plaintiffs, v. Geo. Wirtz et al., Defendants.
Judges: 
Reporter: Washington Reports
Volume: 26
Pages: 702–702

Head Matter:
[No. 3714.
Decided December 19, 1901.]
Nathan Toklas et al., Plaintiffs, v. Geo. Wirtz et al., Defendants.
Appéal from Superior Court, Spokane County. — Hon. Leandeb H. Prather, Judge.
Affirmed.
Lewis & Lewis, for plaintiffs.
Heyburn, Hepburn c€ Doherty, for defendants.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
The plaintiffs brought this action to cancel an escrow agreement for the sale of certain mining properties made between the defendant Wirtz and one Ford, and to compel Wirtz to convey to them an interest in the properties. The trial court granted the relief asked for only in part, and each side appeals from that part of the decree adverse to their respective contentions. The questions presented are questions of fact wholly, upon which there is a direct conflict in the evidence. To review this evidence would subserve no useful purpose. Suffice it to say, therefore, that we have examined with care the entire record, and fail to find that the findings made by the court are not supported by a preponderance of the evidence. The decree must be affirmed, and it is so ordered; neither party to recover costs.