State ex rel. Merriam v. Superior Court

Citations

• 55 Wash. 64
• 104 P. 148
• 1909 Wash. LEXIS 705

Syllabus

<p>Appeal — Review—Pleadings—Amendments — Eminent Domain. Objection to a petition in condemnation by a railroad company, in that it did not state that the petitioner was a common carrier, will not be considered on appeal, where the evidence showed that it was a common carrier authorized to exercise the power of eminent domain; since amendments will be considered as made to conform to the proofs.</p> <p>Eminent Domain — Proceedings — Evidence—Admissibility—Use op Railroad Property. In condemnation proceedings by a railroad company, evidence to show negotiations by the company to trade the land to a city for use as a street in exchange for the vacation of a city street is inadmissible, where a reasonable necessity for the condemnation was shown; since the railroad company could not condemn the land and dispose of it to the city for street purposes.</p> <p>Same — Necessity—Adjoining Streets. In condemnation proceedings by a railroad company, it is not necessary to first show that the city had granted a necessary right of way across adjoining streets.</p> <p>Same — Damages — Evidence — Admissibility — Prices Paid eor Land. In condemnation proceedings, evidence of the prices paid by the petitioner for property in the vicinity is inadmissible on the question of values.</p> <p>Same — Increase. In condemnation proceedings, evidence of a general increase in the value of property is inadmissible on the subject of values, when not limited to the vicinity of the property condemned.</p> <p>Same — Prices Paid. In condemnation proceedings, evidence of the prices paid for the property one year previous to the condemnation is admissible on the subject of values.</p> <p>Trial — Instructions. It is not error to refuse requested instructions covered in the general charge.</p>