Portland & Seattle Railway Co. v. Ladd

Citations

• 47 Wash. 88
• 91 P. 573
• 1907 Wash. LEXIS 715

Syllabus

<p>Continuance—Absence ojt Party. It is not an abuse of discretion to deny an application for a continuance on the ground of the absence of' one of the parties holding a one-third interest in the property in dispute, where it does not appear that his testimony or presence was necessary at the trial.</p> <p>Evidence—Documentary—Maps. In a condemnation proceeding, maps showing the location of the railroad are admissible as illustrative of the evidence of the witnesses, where they are shown to he accurate by witnesses who had scaled the maps and compared' them with the government field notes, although such witnesses had not surveyed the ground or made the maps.</p> <p>Appeal—Review—Evidence—Harmless Error. In a condemnation proceeding the admission of improper maps as to the location of the road is harmless error, where there was no dispute as to the location, and the only question for the jury was as to the value of the land taken.</p> <p>Lis Pendens—Eminent Domain. Bal. Code, § 4887, authorizing the filing of a Ms pendens, in all “actions affecting the title of real property,” applies to condemnation proceedings, and subsequent purchasers are hound by the proceedings.</p> <p>Eminent Domain—Damages—To Property Not Taken—Value. In condemnation proceedings, where defendants claimed damages to land not taken valuable as a quarry, for the reason that the stone could not be profitably quarried without taking and throwing it down on the lands taken, and also, as the evidence showed, upon lands owned by the railroad company, the court properly instructed the jury that no damages could he allowed for the injury to the quarry if it could ndt he profitably worked except by throwing rock upon the lands already owned by the railroad company.</p> <p>Rudkin, J., dissenting.</p>