Spokane Interurban Railway Co. v. Connelly

Citations

• 48 Wash. 515
• 93 P. 1082
• 1908 Wash. LEXIS 908

Syllabus

<p>Eminent Domain — Proceedings—Notice—Proof of Service — Process — Supplemental Proof. It is discretionary on motion to quash a service of notice in condemnation proceedings for inadequate proof, to permit the filing of a supplementary affidavit showing proper service, where the first affidavit was technically insufficient in that the party making the service was shown to be twenty-one years of age when sworn, and not when the service was made, two days earlier.</p> <p>Same — Jurisdiction on Defective Proof — Statutes—-Construction. In condemnation proceedings, Bal. Code, § 5638, providing that due proof of service of notice must be filed before or at the time of presenting the petition, does not affect the jurisdiction of the court to allow the filing of further proof of service to cure a technical defect, where the party had been actually duly served, in view of the further provision that all, persons served with notice shall be bound by subsequent proceedings.</p>