Johnson v. City of Tacoma

Citations

• 41 Wash. 51
• 82 P. 1092
• 1905 Wash. LEXIS 1065

Syllabus

<p>Evidence — Expert—Values. . Opinion or expert evidence is admissible to show the amount of benefits to real estate by reason of local improvements.</p> <p>Evidence — Experts—Competency. Real estate men having knowledge of the neighborhood are qualified to give opinion evidence as to the value of benefits from local improvements.</p> <p>Municipal Corporations — Local Improvements — Assessments— Evidence — Admissibility. It is immaterial that papers were introduced in evidence to show the authority of the commissioner of public works to deduct sums from the assessment of certain lots and add to the assessment of other lots, where the action of the commissioner was afterwards ratified by the city council.</p> <p>Same — Benefits—Situation op Lots. Where lots are so situated as to leave an entrance from two streets it cannot be said that They do not abut upon the street at the rear of the houses as constructed thereon, or are not benefited by the improvement of such street.</p> <p>Same — Assessments—Apportionment. Where the improvement of a street required the construction of retaining walls to support the lower side of a street, and retaining walls had been constructed by certain lot owners, making it unnecessary for the city to construct such walls in front of such lots, it is not error to find the value of such walls to be $30 per lot, and that such lots would be benefited that much less by the improvement than other lots similarly situated, and the amount thus deducted may be equitably distributed in a proper ratio upon such other lots in the district, as the council find are not assessed to their full share of the expense according to the benefits received.</p>