Hotel Cecil Co. v. City of Seattle

Citations

• 104 Wash. 460
• 177 P. 347

Syllabus

<p>Municipal Corporations (405) — Torts —Of Police Officers — Abatement of Nuisance — Liability—Pleading. A complaint alleging that a city, “through its duly constituted officers, determined” that plaintiffs place of business constituted a nuisance, will not by inference be considered as alleging that any court of the city, or that the city council by ordinance, had determined the fact; in view of Rem. Code, § 287, as to the manner of pleading such a determination, and § 291, providing for the pleading of an ordinance by title and date of passage.</p> <p>Same (405). A complaint alleging the abatement and destruction, by police officers acting as agents of the city of Seattle, of plaintiff’s place of business as a nuisance, without alleging affirmative action by the city council, is subject to general demurrer, in that it fails to allege that the officers represented the city acting for itself in its corporate, as distinguished from its governmental (and nonliability) capacity; in view of Rem. Code, § 7507, subd. 31, including, in the enumeration of corporate powers, for which the city would be liable, the power to declare nuisances and abate the same, and of Seattle charter, art. 4, § 18, subd. 31, providing that the city may, by ordinance and not otherwise, declare nuisances and provide for the abatement of the same.</p>