State ex rel. Spokane Falls & Northern Railway Co. v. Superior Court

Citations

• 40 Wash. 389
• 82 P. 417
• 1905 Wash. LEXIS 990

Syllabus

<p>Eminent Domain — Application by Railway to Condemn Lands Appropriated by Another Railway — Necessity — Findings ■ — ■ Evidence — Sufficiency. No sufficient necessity is shown for a condemnation by one railroad of lands appropriated by another railroad for its city terminals, already restricted on one side by a river and on the other by another railroad, where it appears that the lands were hardly sufficient, and were absolutely required by the defendant company, that the petitioner’s ostensible object of the condemnation was to reach certain Lusiness houses and manufacturing plants to which it already had means of access over the tracks of another railroad company, and also by other routes, and the only reason why it did not reach the point over several other available routes was the question of expense, and there was no attempt to show what such extra expense would be; since the necessity must be great to justify the right to appropriate the terminal grounds of another company.</p> <p>Same — Defendant Railway Not in Operation — Road Being Established — Lands Purchased for Terminals — Protection of Rights. A railroad company not yet in operation will be protected from the appropriation of its terminal rights to the same degree as a road that is in operation, where it appears that it is constructing its road, and would be in operation in the near future, and had spent large sums in securing terminals; since it is necessary to secure terminal facilities before beginning operation.</p>