City of Tacoma v. Brown

Citations

• 69 Wash. 538
• 125 P. 940
• 1912 Wash. LEXIS 945

Syllabus

<p>Eminent Domain—Streets—Public Necessity—Determination by City Council—Review. The determination by the city council of the necessity for extending or widening streets being conclusive on the courts, no prejudice results from an ex parte order of court declaring the necessity, or from an order striking answers setting up, a lack of public necessity, the city council having determined the question.</p> <p>Same—Public Necessity—Use by Railroad. The widening of a street to be given over in part to a railway company is a public use, and will not be reviewed by the courts in the absence of positive fraud.</p> <p>Same—Damages—Verdict—Review. The supreme court will not substitute its judgment for that of the jury as to the damages awarded in condemnation, especially where the jury viewed the property.</p> <p>Appeal—Review—Objections Waived. Objections to the form of the verdict cannot be urged, on appeal where counsel waived the same below when the verdict was received.</p>