Court Opinion

ID: 4001381
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2016-07-06 10:58:01.467881+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:44:53.942340
License: Public Domain

To avoid any possible confusion or misunderstanding in the future, I think that the majority opinion herein should specifically state that, because of the circumstances here shown, the Departmental opinion herein, ante p. 215, is no longerauthoritative. See Nettleship v. Shipman, 161 Wash. 292, 298,296 P. 1056, 1059; Mitchell v. Maytag-Pacific-IntermountainCo., 184 Wash. 342, 350, 51 P.2d 393, 396.
ROBINSON and DRIVER, JJ., concur with STEINERT, J.