State ex rel. Grant Realty Co. v. Superior Court

Citations

• 76 Wash. 376
• 136 P. 144
• 1913 Wash. LEXIS 1822

Syllabus

<p>Prohibition — Grounds—Jurisdiction—Eminent Domain — Trial —Parties—Substitution. Where, after an order of condemnation against certain defendants, and “all unknown owners,” and before the trial of the question of damages, the defendants served moved for a substitution of third parties, who had acquired defendants’ rights and other rights not adjudicated in the first proceeding, the court had jurisdiction to determine whether it would set aside its former order of condemnation and try anew that question, or whether it would relegate the parties to an independent action and proceed with the trial of the question of damages; hence prohibition will not lie to control its action, as prohibition issues only when the court is acting without or in excess of jurisdiction and there is no adequate remedy at law.</p> <p>Certiorari — When Lies — Interlocutory Orders. Certiorari does not lie to review an order refusing to permit a substitution of parties in a condemnation case (after an order of condemnation) and refusing to set aside the condemnation and try that question anew as to rights not' adjudicated instead of relegating the new parties to an independent proceeding; since the order was interlocutory, and reviewable, if at all, only after final judgment in the case.</p> <p>Eminent Domain — Proceedings—Judgment—-Res Judicata — Dismissal Without Prejudice. After entry of an order of condemnation, an order refusing to allow a substitution of parties, who had acquired defendants’ interests, with other rights not adjudicated in the first proceeding, but permitting such parties to appear and participate in the trial of the question of damages, is not res judicata as to their claims of a superior right, the effect of the order being a dismissal without prejudice.</p>