Blomskog, Erickson & Cotton v. City of Seattle

Citations

• 107 Wash. 471
• 182 P. 571
• 1919 Wash. LEXIS 776

Syllabus

<p>Municipal Corporations .(190, 194)—Damages—Removal op Lateral Support—Defenses. It is no defense to an action against a city for damages to abutting property through a regrade of a street, removing plaintiff’s lateral support, that plaintiff petitioned for the improvement, and evidence thereof would have been error tending to confuse the jury on the subject of the damages.</p> <p>Same (190, 197). — Damages — Removal of Lateral Support — Evidence—Admissibility. In an action against a city for damages to abutting property through the regrade of a street removing plaintiff’s lateral support, it is inadmissible for the city to show its intention and future plans for taking care of the situation or to allow expert real estate witnesses to answer questions based thereon.</p> <p>Evidence (214)—Opinions—Basis of. It is improper to ask experts hypothetical questions based on theoretical conjecture of the witnesses.</p> <p>Trial (55-2)—Taking Case Prom Jury — Particular. Issues. Where no evidence is given to support an affirmative defense, it should be withdrawn from the consideration of the jury.</p>