City of Puyallup v. Lacey

Citations

• 43 Wash. 110
• 86 P. 215
• 1906 Wash. LEXIS 663

Syllabus

<p>Eminent Domain — Appeal—Decisions Reviewable. Under Laws 1905, p. 102, o. 55, § 50, appeals in appropriation proceedings by cities are not restricted to tbe question of damages, but are to be governed by tbe procedure in other civil cases; bence an appeal from an order of dismissal brings up for review, under Bal. Code, § 6500, subd. 1, an order sustaining a demurrer to tbe petition.</p> <p>Eminent Domain — Delegation op Power — Municipal Corporations — Power to Change Course oe River. While laws conferring tbe right of eminent domain are to be strictly construed, express legislative authority is conferred upon cities to appropriate land for straightening tbe course of rivers.</p> <p>Same — Extent of Power. The operations of a city in straightening the course of a river, under Bal. Code, § 944, where the river forms the boundary line of the city, are not to be confined to the side of the river within the corporate limits, but the city has authority to condemn land within and without its corporate limits.</p> <p>Same — Proceedings to Condemn Land — Petition—Sufficiency. While Bal. Code, § 944, only authorizes condemnation proceedings to straighten the course of a river where the parties cannot agree as to the damages for the land taken, the failure of the parties to agree is not a condition precedent, in view of Laws 1905, p. 84, generally authorizing such an appropriation under specified proceedings.</p> <p>Same — Compensation—Repayment. The damages assessed in a proceeding to authorize a city to condemn land must be paid before the land is taken.</p>