State ex rel. Kennewick Irrigation District v. Superior Court

Citations

• 118 Wash. 517
• 204 P. 1
• 1922 Wash. LEXIS 1215

Syllabus

<p>Eminent Domain (21, 39) — Public Use — Conflicting Claims— Priorities — Public Necessity — Evidence — Sufficiency. The court may determine that the use of the waters of a river by an irrigation company for irrigating a large quantity of arid land, and for the development of power necessary to its irrigation scheme, is superior to the use of such waters by a city fpr merely power purposes in the distribution of water to its inhabitants apart from domestic and city purposes, there being no showing by the city of a necessity for the use of the river waters for domestic purposes, in view of the rule prescribed by Laws 1917, p. 448, § 4, that “in condemnation proceedings the court shall determine what use will be for the greatest public benefit, and that use shall be deemed a superior one;” especially where the irrigation use was prior in time.</p> <p>Same (111) — Proceedings — Parties — Rights of Interveners. Where condemnation proceedings are instituted by an irrigation district against a power company for the purpose of establishing a superior use in the waters of a certain river, a city has no right to intervene therein for the purpose of securing an adjudication upon the city’s right to condemn, as against the power company, property other than that involved in the proceeding by the irrigation company.</p>