Skip to main content
· 8/16/1912

Hapgood v. City of Seattle

Citations

  • 69 Wash. 497
  • 125 P. 965
  • 1912 Wash. LEXIS 938

Syllabus

<p>Municipal Corporations—Lvtprovements—Assessments—Limitations—Statutes—Construction. Under Rem. & Bal. Code, § 7571, which provides that it shall be lawful for a city of the first class to order any improvements the cost of which is to be charged to abutting property when said cost shall not exceed fifty per cent of the valuation of the real estate in the improvement district, a property owner cannot complain of an improvement the cost of which exceeds fifty per cent of such valuation, where no more than such fifty per cent is assessed against the benefited property and the balance is provided by the city from its general fund or other sources.</p> <p>Same—Limitation—Improvement District. Rem. & Bal. Code, § 7571, limiting assessments for local improvements to fifty per cent of the valuation of the real estate within the improvement district, does not limit each assessment to fifty per cent of the value of each lot assessed, nor the total assessment to fifty per cent of the value of all the lots assessed; hut the limit of the assessable cost is fixed by the total valuation of the real estate within the entire district, even if some of the property therein is not benefited and not subject to assessment.</p> <p>Same—Reassessment—Property Liable. The fact that property has been assessed for an improvement, does not prevent a reassessment for an additional charge to make up a deficit arising when part of the assessments were held invalid, such reassessment being expressly authorized by Rem. & Bal. Code, § 7893, to the extent of the benefit which the property received from the improvements.</p> <p>Same—Reassessment—Invalidity oe Original Assessment. Under Rem. & Bal. Code, § 7894, providing for reassessments where the invalidity of the original assessment is established “either directly or by virtue of any decision of the courts,” a reassessment is prima facie authorized where a portion of the lots, found by the jury to be damaged, were adjudged nonassessable for that

Judges: Parker

Read full opinion on CourtListener

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.