State ex rel. Union Lumber Co. v. Superior Court

Citations

• 70 Wash. 540
• 127 P. 109
• 1912 Wash. LEXIS 1079

Syllabus

<p>Eminent Domain — Railroad Crossings — Restricted Use — Adjudication of Necessity. Upon condemnation of a railroad crossing under Rem. & Bal. Code, § 5736, the court may, in view of the isettled rule that the right can be limited and exercised in a stipulated manner, adjudge the public use subject to defendant’s right to use a logging road and upon condition that the petitioner shall construct and keep in repair an overhead crossing for the logging road (Pabkee, J., dissenting).</p> <p>Same — Railroad Crossing — Limited Use — Compensation—Restrictions. In condemning a railroad crossing on condition that the petitioner construct and keep in repair an overhead crossing for defendant’s logging road, tho court may limit the damages to the right condemned and the manner in which it is sought to be exercised.</p> <p>Same — Limited Use — Adjudication of Necessity — Form—Specifications fob Overhead Crossing. An adjudication of public use and necessity for condemning a railroad crossing, on condition that the petitioner construct and maintain an overhead crossing for the defendant’s logging road, is not objectionable in that it is not accompanied by specifications for the construction of a trestle and grade, since that can be left to the trial and the determination of damages to be paid under a particular and designated use, to be shown by plats and appropriate specifications.</p> <p>Same — Public Necessity — Objections—-Necessity of Acquiring Other Lands. An adjudication of a public use and necessity for condemning a railroad crossing is not objectionable in that the petitioner must acquire other lands in order to carry out the scheme for an overhead crossing.</p>