Detamore v. Hindley
Citations
- 83 Wash. 322
- 145 P. 462
Syllabus
<p>Constitutional Law — Police Powers — Delegation. Const., art. 11, § 11, authorizing cities to make and. enforce within their limits all such . . . police . . . and other regulations as are not in conflict with the general laws is a direct delegation of the police power, as ample within its limits as that possessed by the legislature.</p> <p>Railroads — Changing Grade Crossings — Police Power. It is a legitimate exercise by a city of the police power to require a separation of grades where a public service railroad crosses a city street, and is in accord with general laws (Rem. & Bal. Code, §§ 7507, 7510).</p> <p>Municipal Corporations — Franchises —■ Ultra Vires — Railway Bridges Over Streets. Under the delegation of police powers to cities conferred by art. 11, § 11, of the state constitution, and under Rem. & Bal. Code, §§ 7507, 7510, conferring power upon cities of the first class to authorize and regulate the construction and operation of railroads within the corporate limits, to construct and keep in repair bridges, viaducts and tunnels, to authorize the location, construction and operation of railroads “in, along, over and across any highway” or street, the action of the city in granting a franchise ordinance to a railway to construct bridges over certain streets is not ultra vires as being in excess of corporate powers; since not only the power to compel the separation of street grades at railroad crossings is a legitimate exercise of the police power, but authority is expressly conferred by the employment of the word “over” in conjunction with “in, along and across,” in the statute authorizing the grant of such ordinances.</p> <p>Same — Streets—Regulation and Control — Review by Courts. Since the power to require grade separations for streets and railways exists as an integral part of the police power of the city, the appropriate means to its exercise rests largely in the discretion of the city’s governing body, and, in the absence of a clear abuse, will
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- holding that local law “requires no legislative sanction for its exercise so long as the subject-matter is local, and the regulation reasonable and consistent with the general laws” (citing Odd Fellows’ Cemetery Ass’n v. City & County of San Francisco, 140 Cal. 226, 73 P. 987 (1903)
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Ellis
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
28 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Lenci v. City of SeattleWashington Supreme Court· 1964-01-30· cited 133×
- Weden v. San Juan CountyWashington Supreme Court· 1998-07-09· cited 129×
- Petstel, Inc. v. County of KingWashington Supreme Court· 1969-10-23· cited 90×
- Brown v. City of YakimaWashington Supreme Court· 1991-03-28· cited 89×
- City of Bellingham v. SchamperaWashington Supreme Court· 1960-10-20· cited 85×
- City of Seattle v. WilliamsWashington Supreme Court· 1995-12-21· cited 57×
- Spokane County Health District v. BrockettWashington Supreme Court· 1992-11-05· cited 55×
- Biggers v. City of Bainbridge IslandWashington Supreme Court· 2007-10-11· cited 51×
- Allen v. City of BellinghamWashington Supreme Court· 1917-02-17· cited 49×
- Hass v. City of KirklandWashington Supreme Court· 1971-02-18· cited 44×
- Sandona v. City of Cle ElumWashington Supreme Court· 1951-01-12· cited 31×
- City of Seattle v. RossWashington Supreme Court· 1959-09-24· cited 29×
- State v. FlemingWashington Supreme Court· 1924-05-12· cited 21×
- Rhoades v. City of Battle GroundCourt of Appeals of Washington· 2002-12-13· cited 14×
- State v. LarkinWashington Supreme Court· 1924-09-04· cited 13×
- City of Seattle v. Auto Sheet Metal Workers Local 387Court of Appeals of Washington· 1980-11-24· cited 10×
- City of Moses Lake v. United StatesE.D. Washington· 2006-05-04· cited 10×
- Linsler v. Booth Undertaking Co.Washington Supreme Court· 1922-05-13· cited 10×
- City of Seattle v. LongWashington Supreme Court· 1963-04-04· cited 8×
- In re the Sound Transit Co.Washington Supreme Court· 1922-05-01· cited 8×
Cites
11 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Crozer v. People ex rel. HanbergIllinois Supreme Court· 1903-12-16· cited 27×
- Murphy v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co.Illinois Supreme Court· 1910-12-21· cited 26×
- Seibert v. Missouri Pacific Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri· 1905-05-24· cited 21×
- Summerfield v. City of ChicagoIllinois Supreme Court· 1902-06-19· cited 14×
- State ex rel. B. Schade Brewing Co. v. Superior CourtWashington Supreme Court· 1911-02-04· cited 10×
- City of Spokane v. Spokane & Inland Empire RailroadWashington Supreme Court· 1913-10-08· cited 9×
- City of Spokane v. ThompsonWashington Supreme Court· 1912-08-21· cited 7×
- Village of Winnetka v. Chicago & Milwaukee Electric Railway Co.Illinois Supreme Court· 1903-10-26· cited 5×
- Gates v. Kansas City Bridge & Terminal Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri· 1892-06-20· cited 5×
- State ex rel. Ford v. Superior CourtWashington Supreme Court· 1912-01-25· cited 4×
- State v. Superior CourtWashington Supreme Court· 1911-08-19· cited 3×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.