Home/Washington Supreme Court/In re Eighth Avenue Northwest

In re Eighth Avenue Northwest

138 P. 10, 77 Wash. 570, 1914 Wash. LEXIS 946
CourtWashington Supreme Court
DecidedJanuary 24, 1914
DocketNo. 11342
StatusPublished
Cited by13 cases

This text of 138 P. 10 (In re Eighth Avenue Northwest) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Washington Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
In re Eighth Avenue Northwest, 138 P. 10, 77 Wash. 570, 1914 Wash. LEXIS 946 (Wash. 1914).

Opinion

Fullerton, J.

In 1882, the owners of certain lands, lying in sections 11, 12, and 13, in township 25, north, of range 3, east of the Willamette Meridian, in King county, Washington, caused the same to be platted into a number of 10-acre tracts, and to be recorded on the records of King county as the Farmdale Homestead Tracts. The appellants Bailey, in the year following, purchased one of such tracts, designated on the recorded plat as tract 38 of Farmdale Homesteads. For some reason, not shown in the record, the owners of the remaining tracts later became dissatisfied with the [572]*572manner in which the land was platted, and procured a vacation of the plat by the tribunal having jurisdiction in such matters. Still later, they caused the land to be replatted into lots, blocks, streets and alleys of the usual size as an addition to the then city of Ballard, now a part of the city of Seattle. By this replatting the lots, blocks and streets were made to abut upon all sides of the appellants’ property.

In January, 1911, the city of Seattle, by ordinance, provided for the extension of the existing streets over the appellants’ property. The ordinance directed that the cost of the proceeding should be “paid for by special assessment upon the property specially benefited lying within the limits of Tract No. thirty-eight (88), of the Farmdale Homestead Tracts, in section 12, township 25, north, range 8, East, W. M.and that, “any part of the cost of said improvement that is not finally assessed against the property specially benefited shall be paid from the general fund of the city of Seattle;” the tract of land described being the land owned by the appellants. The ordinance further provided that condemnation proceedings be begun by the corporation counsel of the city of Seattle to acquire the land necessary to be taken for the purposes, and to ascertain the compensation to be paid the owners for the lands so taken. Proceedings looking to, that end were accordingly begun in the superior court of King county, and resulted in a judgment of condemnation of the land necessary to be taken for the streets, and an award to the owners by a jury of the sum of $20,985.70. The land taken consisted of a strip 80 feet in width off the west side of the tract; a triangular shaped piece off the south side; a strip 60 feet wide extending through the east side; and two strips each 60 feet in width, extending east and west through the tract; the relative situation being shown in the sketch following. The continuous line shows the boundaries of the appellants’ land, and the broken lines, the street extensions and the immediately surrounding territory.

[573]*573 eqcWsJo5OrwWFTKL9l9AJYZ5LrCSOWAk5jVtUvEmhU8dgXNtWHMj5lw6qSHEvnIKtGK6EOsqisbYPe4q2hu7iSyYspo8V07y78rnaQriXlbDT

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Ray E. And Laurie Gabelein, Respondent's v. Diking District No. 1
Court of Appeals of Washington, 2014
Gabelein v. Diking District No. 1
328 P.3d 1008 (Court of Appeals of Washington, 2014)
Esping v. Pesicka
577 P.2d 152 (Court of Appeals of Washington, 1978)
Citizens for Underground Equality v. City of Seattle
492 P.2d 1071 (Court of Appeals of Washington, 1972)
Stone-Easter, Inc. v. City of Seattle
217 P. 28 (Washington Supreme Court, 1923)
Bolcom Mills, Inc. v. City of Seattle
162 P. 1010 (Washington Supreme Court, 1917)
Horton Investment Co. v. City of Seattle
162 P. 989 (Washington Supreme Court, 1917)
City of Seattle v. Puget Sound Traction, Light & Power Co.
158 P. 252 (Washington Supreme Court, 1916)
City of Vancouver v. Corporation of the Catholic Bishop
156 P. 383 (Washington Supreme Court, 1916)
City of Seattle v. Farwell
87 Wash. 218 (Washington Supreme Court, 1915)
City of Spokane v. Kraft
144 P. 286 (Washington Supreme Court, 1914)
Viegle v. City of Spokane
139 P. 33 (Washington Supreme Court, 1914)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
138 P. 10, 77 Wash. 570, 1914 Wash. LEXIS 946, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-eighth-avenue-northwest-wash-1914.