Skip to main content
· 5/13/1916

Kuehl v. City of Edmonds

Citations

  • 91 Wash. 195
  • 157 P. 850
  • 1916 Wash. LEXIS 1052

Syllabus

<p>Statutes — Reenactment — Construction — Municipal Corporations — Public Improvements — Reassessments. The act of 1911 (3 Rem. & Bal. Code, § 7892-1 et seq.) relating to local improvements by cities, having carried forward the provisions relating to reassessments, is riot to be construed as a new enactment, but as a continuing law from the first amendment in 1893; especially in view of Id., § 7892-70, providing that acts repealed which are reenacted in form or substance shall be construed as continuations or amendments, and saving all proceedings pending under the old law.</p> <p>Municipal Corporations — Public Improvements — Assessments— Limitations — Estimates — Reassessments — Statutes — Construction. Rem. & Bal. Code, § 7705, limiting the power of assessment of a city of the third class under the old law to an amount equal to the estimated cost, does not limit the power of such city to levy a supplemental or reassessment for the full cost of the work, under the subsequent act of 1911, 3 Rem. & Bal. Code, §§ 7892-42 and 7892-43, which reenacted and carried forward the act of 1893 (2 Rem. & Bal. Code, §§ 7893, 7894, 7895, and 7899), authorizing a reassessment based upon the “actual cost of the improvement at the time of its completion,” where the first assessment had failed in whole or in part for any reason, including any “omission, failure or neglect . . . to comply with provisions of the charter or laws ... as to . . . estimate . . .” etc. (overruling on rehearing, Id., 85 Wash. 307).</p> <p>Judgment — Conclusiveness—Reassessments — Municipal Corporations. In the absence of an adjudication of the actual amount of special benefits to specific property assessed, a prior judgment setting aside an assessment as having been in excess of the amount fixed by Rem. & Bal. Code, § 7705, limiting the original assessment by cities of the third class to an amount equal to the estimated cost of the work, is res judicata in proceedings to reassess of nothing save the invali

Judges: Chadwick, Ellis

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.