Case Name: E. T. Young, Appellant, v. Seattle & Lake Washington Waterway Company et al., Respondents
Court: Washington Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Washington
Decision Date: 1923-12-07
Citations: 127 Wash. 694
Docket Number: No. 18094
Parties: E. T. Young, Appellant, v. Seattle & Lake Washington Waterway Company et al., Respondents.
Judges: Main, C. J., Holcomb, Parker, and Mackintosh, JX, concur.
Reporter: Washington Reports
Volume: 127
Pages: 694–694

Head Matter:
[No. 18094.
Department One.
December 7, 1923.]
E. T. Young, Appellant, v. Seattle & Lake Washington Waterway Company et al., Respondents.
Appeal from a judgment of the superior court for King county, Brinker, X, entered October 27, 1922, dismissing an action for equitable relief, tried to the court.
Affirmed.
Ben 8. Sawyer and R. F. Dotsch, for appellant.
Donworth, Todd & Higgins, for respondents:
Reported in 220 Pac. 1119.

Opinion:
Tolman, J.
This is one of those cases in which we must either detail a great number of charges as alleged in appellant's complaint, set forth the substance of the testimony offered to support them, and then draw the conclusion that the evidence wholly fails to prove the charges made; or content ourselves by saying that the questions involved are of fact only, and that we agree with the results reached by the trial court upon the facts. Since there is nothing which can be discussed that will be of general interest, and anything we might say would be valueless as a guide or precedent in the future, we are constrained to say only that, after reading and considering the evidence offered, we are convinced that appellant failed to prove any cause of action.
The judgment appealed from is therefore affirmed.
Main, C. J., Holcomb, Parker, and Mackintosh, JX, concur.