Smith v. City of Centralia

Citations

• 55 Wash. 573
• 104 P. 797
• 1909 Wash. LEXIS 802

Syllabus

<p>Municipal Corporations — Streets —• Vacation — Abutting Owners — Rights. An abutting property owner on a street has an interest different in kind from that of the public, where the street is vacated so as to close or affect his access, and may maintain an action to set aside an illegal vacation.</p> <p>Same — Power oe Courts — Invalid Ordinances. The courts have power to set aside a vacation of a street, although the same is a legislative function, where the law or ordinance is invalid and an attempt to enforce it is made or threatened.</p> <p>Same — Statutory Proceedings — Validity oe Vacation. The vacation of a street pursuant to Laws 1901, p. 175, is invalid, where the petition was not signed by the owners of more than two-thirds of the private property abutting upon that part of the street, the notice was not given, and the ordinance vacated part of the street not described.</p> <p>Eminent Domain —“Property”— Vacating Streets — Compensation. The interest of an abutting property owner in the maintenance of the street is property of which he cannot be deprived until just compensation has been paid.</p> <p>Municipal Corporations — Ordinance — Adoption — Interest oe Councilmen. An ordinance vacating a street is invalid where a councilman who cast the deciding vote for its passage was one of the petitioners, and would profit by its enactment.</p>