Opinion · Washington Court of Appeals Opinions
SPRINKLER INDUSTRY v. SUPERIOR FIRE PROTECTION, 35 Wn. App. 1018 (1983)
SPRINKLER Indus. SUPPLEMENTAL PENSION FUND, Respondent, v. SUPERIOR FIREPROTECTION Co., INC., Appellant., 35 Wash. App. 1018 (Wash. Ct. App. 1983)
- Type
- Opinion
- Court
- Washington Court of Appeals Opinions
- Jurisdiction
- Washington
- Date
- 1983-07-05
- Topic
- general
SPRINKLER INDUSTRY v. SUPERIOR FIRE PROTECTION, 35 Wn. App. 1018 (1983) SPRINKLER INDUSTRY SUPPLEMENTAL PENSION FUND, Respondent, v. SUPERIOR FIREPROTECTION COMPANY, INC., Appellant. No. 9929-9-I.The Court of Appeals of Washington, Division One.
Citator
UpLaw has not yet analyzed SPRINKLER INDUSTRY v. SUPERIOR FIRE PROTECTION, 35 Wn. App. 1018 (1983). The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.
SPRINKLER INDUSTRY v. SUPERIOR FIRE PROTECTION,35 Wn. App. 1018(1983)
SPRINKLER INDUSTRY SUPPLEMENTAL PENSION FUND,Respondent,v. SUPERIOR FIRE
PROTECTION COMPANY, INC.,Appellant.
No. 9929-9-I.
The Court of Appeals of Washington, Division One.
July 5, 1983.
UNREPORTED OPINION
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for King County, No. 865135, Thomas Grimm, J. Pro Tem., entered February 19, 1981.
Affirmedby unpublished opinion per Callow, J., concurred in by Corbett and Scholfield, JJ.
- [EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.] ↩