MILMANCO CORP. v. COOKE, 78 Wn.2d 490 (1970)

475 P.2d 884

MILMANCO CORPORATION, Respondent, PHILIP B. LUNDSTROM et al., Appellants, v. THOMAS H. COOKE et al., Respondents.[*]

No. 40906.The Supreme Court of Washington. En Banc.
October 29, 1970.

[1] Appeal and Error — Findings of Fact — Review — In General.
A reviewing court will affirm challenged findings of fact and resultant conclusions of law when an examination of the record shows substantial evidence to support them. [1] See 5 Am.Jur.2d, Appeal and Error § 839 et seq.

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for King County, No. 664325, Stanley C. Soderland, J., entered June 28, 1968 Affirmed.

Action for breach of fiduciary duty. Part of the plaintiffs appeal from a judgment in favor of the defendants.

Jennings P. Felix, Felix Kraft, and Luzerne E. Hufford, Jr., for appellants.

John H. Faltys and Uziel Faltys, for respondents.

PER CURIAM.

Appellants Lundstrom appeal from a judgment in favor of respondents Cooke. The record indicates that a recitation of the facts which gave rise to the lawsuit will serve no useful purpose.

[1] The assignments of error upon which this appeal is predicated are directed solely to five findings of fact entered by the trial court. Since our examination of the record discloses substantial evidence to support each of the challenged findings of fact and resultant conclusions of law, we affirm. United Pac. Ins. Co. v. Lundstrom, 77 Wn.2d 162, 459 P.2d 930 (1969).

Page 491