JAMES R. ADKINSON, ET AL., PLAINTIFFS/APPELLANTS,
v.
DIGBY, INC., ET AL., DEFENDANTS/APPELLEES
JAMES R. ADKINSON, ET AL., PLAINTIFFS/APPELLANTS,
DIGBY, INC., ET AL., DEFENDANTS/APPELLEES
704 F.2d 1134
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (1983)
Cited by 5 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM:
Following argument and submission, this court certified to the Supreme Court of the State of Washington this question:
Is an action timely filed under RCW 4.16.170 if the complaint is filed on the last day permitted under the relevant statute of limitations and the defendant, although not served with process within 90 days thereafter, files a voluntary notice of appearance within those 90 days?
The Washington court’s opinion, reported in 99 Wash.2d 206, 660 P. 2d 756 (1983) (en banc) concludes that the answer is no. The facts presented to the district court and to us are summarized in the opinion of the Washington court.
The judgment of the district court is affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
In re Pizza OF Haw., Inc. v. Shakey's, Inc., 761 F.2d 1374 (9th Cir. 1985)
-
Boston & Me. Corp. v. Chicago Pac. Corp., 785 F.2d 562 (7th Cir. 1986)
-
In re Pub. Serv. Co. OF NEW Hampshire v. NEW Hampshire Elec. Coop., Inc., 884 F.2d 11 (1st Cir. 1989)
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence