From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Pederson v. Pederson

The Supreme Court of Washington. Department One
Oct 29, 1952
249 P.2d 385 (Wash. 1952)

Opinion

No. 32007.

October 29, 1952.

APPEAL AND ERROR — ASSIGNMENT OF ERRORS — ERRORS NOT PROPERLY ASSIGNED IN BRIEF — FINDINGS. An assignment of error that "the trial court erred in entering its findings of fact and conclusions of law" is insufficient under Rule on Appeal 43 to challenge the findings of fact of the trial court; and they therefore become the established facts of the case.

See 3 Am. Jur. 293.

Appeal from a judgment of the superior court for Spokane county, Kelly, J., entered September 22, 1951, dismissing an action for divorce and awarding a decree of separate maintenance. Affirmed.

Wilmot W. Garvin, for appellant.

Thos. A.E. Lally and Thomas P. Graham, for respondent.



The appellant husband brought this action for divorce. The wife cross-complained for separate maintenance. From a judgment dismissing the husband's complaint with prejudice and awarding the wife separate maintenance, the husband appeals.

After a rather extended trial, the court entered seventeen separate findings of fact and three conclusions of law, all contained in eight typewritten pages.

[1] Appellant makes three assignments of error. Appellant's first assignment of error reads:

"The trial court erred in entering its findings of fact and conclusions of law."

Respondent urges that this assignment is insufficient under Rule on Appeal 43, 34A Wn.2d 47, to challenge the findings of fact of the trial court, and that they therefore become the "established facts of the case." With this we agree. Appellant's first assignment of error is the same we held insufficient in Fowles v. Sweeney, ante p. 182, 248 P.2d 400, and cases cited.

The second assignment is directed to the court's refusal to enter judgment for plaintiff. The third assignment is that the court erred in entering judgment for defendant. The conclusions of law, which are supported by the findings of fact, sustain the decree from which this appeal has been prosecuted.

The decree and judgment entered September 22, 1951, is affirmed.

February 16, 1953. Petition for rehearing denied.


Summaries of

Pederson v. Pederson

The Supreme Court of Washington. Department One
Oct 29, 1952
249 P.2d 385 (Wash. 1952)
Case details for

Pederson v. Pederson

Case Details

Full title:O. JORGEN PEDERSON, Appellant, v. BEDA E. PEDERSON, Respondent

Court:The Supreme Court of Washington. Department One

Date published: Oct 29, 1952

Citations

249 P.2d 385 (Wash. 1952)
249 P.2d 385
41 Wash. 2d 368

Citing Cases

Paulson v. Higgins

[1] This court has held without exception that failure to comply with Rule 43, supra, will make the findings…

In re Patel

Assigning error to a trial court's entire findings of facts, without separately assigning error to each truly…