City of Seattle v. Littell

Citations

• 55 Wash. 116
• 104 P. 133
• 1909 Wash. LEXIS 717

Syllabus

<p>Eminent Domain — Damages—Appeal—Review. The verdict of a jury, awarding damages in a condemnation case, will not be disturbed on appeal when supported by any competent evidence and the jury viewed the premises.</p> <p>Same — Streets—Public Use and Necessity. When the city council, by due ordinance, directed the improvement of streets, the court must determine that the improvement was a public necessity and for a public use.</p> <p>Evidence — Experts. Objections going to the weight rather than the competency of expert evidence are properly overruled.</p> <p>Same — Damages—Evidence. Upon an issue as to compensation in condemnation proceedings, where damages were claimed by reason of loss of business while buildings were being raised to a new street level, evidence is admissible of the cost of an abutment on the street line which would permit of the use of the buildings without raising them.</p> <p>Same — Improvement oe Streets — Restriction—Judgment. In condemnation proceedings, where damages were claimed by reason of the raising of surrounding streets, on two of which approaches were proposed, extending not exceeding four hundred feet, plans, drawings and the testimony of the city engineer that the approaches were to extend but 163 feet, amount to a stipulation to that effect, and entitles the owner to have the restriction inserted in the judgment awarding damages by reason of the improvement with the approaches restricted to 163 feet.</p>