Columbia River Telephone Co. v. Department of Public Works
Decision Date | 19 July 1928 |
Docket Number | 21062. |
Citation | 269 P. 6,148 Wash. 395 |
Court | Washington Supreme Court |
Parties | COLUMBIA RIVER TELEPHONE CO. v. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS. |
Appeal from Superior Court, Yakima County; A. W. Hawkins, Judge.
Action by the Columbia River Telephone Company against the Department of Public Works, to review an order entered in a proceeding instituted to value the property of the plaintiff. From a judgment affirming the order, the plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.
Cleland & Clifford, of Olympia, for appellant.
John H Dunbar and H. C. Brodie, both of Olympia, for respondent.
The appellant telephone company seeks in this court reversal of a judgment of the superior court for Yakima county, affirming an order of the State Department of Public Works finding and fixing the value of appellant's public service property appellant contending that, in so far as the department refused to consider and add to the valuation of its property a substantial amount based upon so-called going concern value, its order is erroneous and prejudicial to appellant.
The department refused to consider going concern value as an element in the value of appellant's public service property, manifestly because of the department's view of the provisions of section 10441, Rem. Comp. Stat. under which it was proceeding in making the valuation. That section, in so far as we need here notice its language, reads as follows:
That section further provides for a review in the superior court of the department's findings and fixing of value, and correction thereof by that court, if found by the court to be 'unfair, unwarranted or unjust,' and for appeal from the decision of the superior court thereon to this court, and further provides that the findings of the department, or as they may be finally by the courts corrected or directed to be corrected, 'shall be conclusive evidence of the facts stated in such findings as of the date therein stated under conditions then existing, * * * and such facts can only be controverted by showing a subsequent change in conditions bearing upon the facts therein determined,' and further provides that the department shall, 'from time to time, cause further hearings to be had for the purpose of ascertaining the betterments, improvements, additions, and extensions made by any public service company to its property subsequent to the date of any prior hearing.'
This is not a rate-fixing proceeding, though its final determination may furnish evidence pertinent to some future inquiry looking to the change of appellant's present established rates charged and collected by it. It is manifestly because the final determination of this proceeding will be evidence of the value of appellant's public service property, as of the date of the valuation so made, that appellant seeks to have now included therein a substantial amount as going concern value.
It will be noticed that section 10441, Rem. Comp. Stat., specifies in considerable detail the elements of...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Columbia River Telephone Co. v. Department of Public Works
...Yakima County; A. W. Hawkins, Judge. On rehearing. Former opinion adhered to, and judgment affirmed. For original opinion, see 148 Wash. 395, 269 P. 6. & Clifford, of Olympia, for appellant. John H. Dunbar and H. C. Brodie, both of Olympia, for respondents. MILLARD, J. By our en banc opinio......