Short v. Demopolis

Supreme Court of Washington · Decided 1984-11-06

Cited by 133 later decision(s) in our corpus · see the citation network in Lexace

Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case

From the opinion

Dolliver, J. May lawyers be subject to liability under the Consumer Protection Act (CPA), RCW 19.86? Defendant Chris Demopolis appeals the Superior Court order which dismissed his counterclaims under CR 12(b)(6) for CPA violations against the plaintiffs' law firm of Short and Cressman. In March 1980, Demopolis met with Douglas Hartwich, partner in plaintiffs’ law firm, to discuss representation in two pending la…

Read the full opinion (source) ↗


Lexace provides legal information, not legal advice, and no attorney–client relationship is created. Citation figures are counts of later citing opinions in our corpus and may be incomplete; always read and Shepardize the full opinion before relying on it.