Weed v. Goodwin

Citations

• 36 Wash. 31
• 78 P. 36
• 1904 Wash. LEXIS 509

Syllabus

<p>Statutes — Title of Act — Sufficiency ■ — • Eminent Domain— Right of Way fob Irrigation. Laws 1899, p. 261, entitled, “An act providing for condemnation proceedings for right of way for irrigation ditches, canals and flumes for agricultural and mining purposes, and relating to right of appropriation of water,” is not unconstitutional as embracing more than one subject, since its subject relates singly to the right of appropriation of waters, and all the subsidary details are germane thereto, and are means for carrying the object into effect, and necessary for its enforcement.</p> <p>Eminent Domain — Constitutional ' Law — Due Process — Notice. By Laws 1899 p. 261, for the condemnation of rights of way for irrigation purposes, the filing of a complaint and the issuance and service of a summons, as in civil cases, and the assessment of damages by a jury, provides ample notice and due process of law, although the law contains no express provision that the plaintiff shall maintain the requirements of the statute at the trial, since that is jurisdictional and follows as a matter of course.</p> <p>Same — Provision for Damages Aside from Value of Land. Laws 1899, p. 2'61, for the condemnation of rights of way for purposes of irrigation, sufficiently provides for the assessment of damages aside from the value of the land taken by directing the jury to “determine the value of the land occupied and damages,” and authorizing judgment “for the full amount of the value of the land and damages.”</p>