A Legal Dispute Over Ballard's City Debt
Attorney Fred H. Peterson defends his professional reputation after being accused of negligence by the Ballard City Council.
The story, cleaned up
A cleaned-up reading of the newspaper page: spelling and layout repaired, one story lifted off a crowded page. It follows the original closely but it is not a transcription. The original page is below; read it if a detail matters.
To the Editor of the Post-Intelligencer: In today's issue is a report of the Ballard council proceedings wherein I was charged with negligence in relation to the case of Thornton against the city of Ballard. The fact is I had nothing whatever to do with that case until this month. This was seven months after the case had been heard before a jury and judgment entered against the city. About January 19 I was consulted by a committee of the Ballard council with a view to annul that judgment, and on January 15 I rendered a written opinion agreeing to proceed in the superior court to vacate the judgment for $50, and if necessary to appeal to the supreme court for $150 additional, these sums to cover all costs. Those terms were less than a reasonable fee for the services to be rendered, but the council declined to accept my offer, and have not even paid me for what I did. Since then I have been under no obligations to perform any services in that case, and why I should be accused of negligence after my offer had been rejected seems inexplicable. Fred H. Peterson.
“Why I should be accused of negligence after my offer had been rejected seems inexplicable.”
Ballard was an independent city before being annexed by Seattle in 1907. This dispute over legal fees and municipal liability reflects the growing pains of a young city struggling with the costs of its own governance.
From readers
No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.