Hatch v. Tacoma, O. & G.H.R. Co.

Decision Date01 March 1893
Citation6 Wash. 1,32 P. 1063
PartiesHATCH ET UX. v. TACOMA, O. & G. H. R. CO.
CourtWashington Supreme Court

Appeal from superior court, Thurston county; J. W. Robinson, Judge.

Action by Zephaniah J. Hatch and wife against the Tacoma, Olympia &amp Gray's Harbor Railroad Company to recover damages to plaintiffs' lots, abutting on a certain street in the city of Olympia, on which defendant has constructed its road by authority of such city. From a judgment dismissing the action, plaintiffs appeal. Reversed.

Allen & Ayer, for appellants.

Mitchell Ashton & Chapman, for respondent.

ANDERS J.

The appellants sued the respondent to recover damages alleged to have been occasioned to their property by the building and operating of a railroad along Seventh street, in the city of Olympia. The complaint alleges: "(3) That on said date plaintiffs became the owners in fee, and obtained possession and are now such owners, and have possession, and at all times hereinafter mentioned were such owners, and had possession, of that certain tract of land situate at the northeast corner of Franklin street and Seventh street, in the city of Olympia, county of Thurston, and state of Washington, known, designated, and numbered on the original plat of the town (now said city) of Olympia as lots numbered respectively, eight (8) and seven, (7,) in block numbered thirty-six, (36,) which plat is, and for many years has been, on file in the auditor's office of said county; said lots being the southwest quarter of said block. (4) That each of said lots fronts, and is sixty (60) feet wide, on said Seventh street, and extends northward, at right angles with said street, one hundred and twenty (120) feet; the west line of said lot numbered eight (8) being on Franklin street aforesaid. (5) That plaintiffs are the owners in fee of so much of the land on which Seventh street aforesaid is located as lies on the front of, and adjacent to, said lots, and extends to the middle line of said street, and they are the owners in fee of so much of the land on which said Franklin street is located as lies on the west of, and adjacent to, lot numbered eight, (8,) and extends to the middle line of said Franklin street. Each of said streets is sixty (60) feet wide. (6) Plaintiffs say that heretofore, to wit, on the _____ day of May, 1891, and on divers and sundry days thereafter, the defendant, the Tacoma, Olympia & Gray's Harbor Railroad Company, aforesaid, its officers, agents, servants, and employes, without the consent of these plaintiffs, or of either of them, and wrongfully and unlawfully, entered upon the land of plaintiffs on Seventh street, described in the fifth paragraph of this complaint, and without the consent of plaintiffs, or either of them, and wrongfully and unlawfully, did dig up and carry away the soil thereof, and did cut a deep tunnel along and across said land, to the full extent of the width and length of said Seventh street, in front of said lots, and greatly to plaintiffs' damage. (7) That plaintiffs' said land, described in paragraphs 3 and 4 herein, is improved property, and has thereon a valuable dwelling house, in which plaintiffs reside, and have for several years resided, and other valuable buildings, fruit trees, and other improvements. (8) That the said defendant, its officers, agents, servants, and employes, have constructed a railway along said tunnel, and have covered said tunnel with timbers and plank for the purpose of making a roadway over said tunnel and along said Seventh street, for public travel and passage, and have wrongfully and unlawfully changed and raised the grade of said street five (5) feet above the grade that had been established theretofore on said street by the city of Olympia, and that existed at the time said tunnel was cut and made as aforesaid. (9) That said defendant, its officers, agents, servants, and employes, have wrongfully and unlawfully changed and raised the grade of Franklin street, making the approach on said street to said covered way five (5) feet at the point said street intersects with said covered way, and have wrongfully and unlawfully extended said altered grade along said Franklin street, in front of said plaintiffs' said land, buildings, and improvements. (10) That said defendant, its officers, agents, servants, and employes, by doing the acts and things alleged in paragraphs 8 and 9 herein, have put and left plaintiffs' aforesaid lots, buildings, and improvements at a depth of five (5) feet below the top of said covered way on Seventh street, and at the intersection of Seventh and Franklin streets, and along Franklin street, have destroyed ingress and egress to and from said property on Seventh street, and for one-half the length thereof on Franklin street, and have thereby greatly impaired and lessened the value of said lots, buildings, and improvements. (11) That said defendant is actively engaged, through its officers, agents, employes, and servants, in operating its railroad, and in running passenger and freight trains, drawn by steam engines, along and through said tunnel daily, and that in so doing the smoke and sparks from said engines are thrown off in said tunnel in great quantities, and the rumble and noise produced by said trains are very great, and that plaintiffs' residence and buildings aforesaid are daily endangered and rendered unsafe and uncomfortable thereby, and the value thereof materially and greatly impaired and lessened. (12) That said defendant, its officers, agents, servants, and employes, by reason of the acts and things alleged herein, have damaged plaintiffs in the sum of five thousand ($5,000) dollars." The respondent filed an answer admitting the construction and operating of the railroad as set forth in the complaint, but denying any knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the ownership of the property described in the complaint; denying that plaintiffs are the owners of the fee to the middle line of the streets adjoining said premises; that defendant raised the grade of said streets to any extent whatever, or that it destroyed ingress or egress to and from said property on said streets, or that it thereby, or at all, has lessened or impaired the value of said lots, buildings, or improvements, or either of them; that, in running its trains along and through said tunnel, the smoke and sparks from said engines are thrown off from said tunnel, or that the rumble and noise produced by said trains are very great, or great at all, or that plaintiffs' residence or buildings are injured or rendered unsafe or uncomfortable thereby, or that any of the acts complained of were wrongfully or unlawfully done, or that plaintiffs have been damaged by any acts of defendant in any sum whatever. And, as a further answer, defendant alleged: "(1) That at all the times herein mentioned it was a railroad corporation, duly incorporated under and by virtue of the laws of the state of Washington, and that the uses and purposes of said corporation, for which it was so incorporated, and in which it is, and at all the times in said complaint mentioned was, engaged, constitute and are a public use. (2) That Seventh and Franklin streets, of the city of Olympia, are, and at all the times in said complaint mentioned were, and for upwards of twenty years immediately preceding any of the times mentioned in said complaint had been, public streets and highways of said city, and at a time many years prior to the plaintiffs', or either of them, acquiring any right or interest in and to the lots, or either of them, mentioned in said complaint, had been designated and laid down upon the original plat of said city, and donated and granted to the public forever upon said plat, designated and laid off as such, and which said plat had theretofore, to wit, at a time more than twenty years prior to any of the times mentioned in said complaint, been recorded in the office of the auditor of said Thurston county, in which said city of Olympia is and was situated. (3) That, at all the times mentioned in said complaint and herein, said city of Olympia was duly incorporated as a municipal corporation under and by virtue of the laws of the then Territory of Washington. (4) That on the 10th day of June, 1890, pursuant to the powers and authority by law invested in it, and under and by virtue of the express power and authority conferred by an act of the legislature of the Territory of Washington passed and approved on the 28th day of November, 1883, entitled, 'An act to incorporate the city of Olympia,' the mayor and city council of said city of Olympia did, by an ordinance, No. 399, of said city, entitled 'An ordinance granting a right of way to the Tacoma, Olympia & Gray's Harbor Railroad Co. over certain streets, and alleys, and authority to construct a railroad and lay out depot grounds within the city of Olympia,' authorize and grant the defendant the right and privilege of constructing, equipping, maintaining, and operating its line of railway over, along, through, across, and under certain streets and alleys of the city of Olympia, and, among others, Seventh and Franklin streets aforesaid, which said grant, so conferred, was accepted by the company. (5) That under and by virtue of said ordinance, so passed, this defendant, through its proper officers and agents, did construct its...

To continue reading

Request your trial
9 cases
  • Vanderburgh v. City of Minneapolis
    • United States
    • Minnesota Supreme Court
    • June 15, 1906
    ...or depreciates its value deprives the owner of his property. State v. Julow, 129 Mo. 163, 173; Town v. Leopold, 106 Ind. 29; Hatch v. Tacoma, 6 Wash. 1; Port Huron v. Voorheis, 50 Mich. 506; Morris Mayor, 10 N.J.Eq. 352; Abendroth v. Manhattan, 122 N.Y. 1, and see Fort Scott v. Fox, 42 Kan.......
  • Blackwell, E. & S.W. Ry. Co. v. Gist
    • United States
    • Oklahoma Supreme Court
    • June 13, 1907
    ... ... Salt Lake Rapid Transit Co., 33 P ... 229, 9 Utah, 31, 24 L. R. A. 610; Kaufman v. Tacoma, ... etc., Co., 40 P. 137, 11 Wash. 632; Hatch v ... Railroad, 32 P. 1063, 6 Wash. 1; 1 Hare, ... ...
  • Lund v. Idaho & W.N.R.R.
    • United States
    • Washington Supreme Court
    • October 15, 1908
    ... ... others, must be met and dealt with as they arise.' This ... case was followed by Hatch v. Tacoma, etc., R. R ... Co., 6 Wash. 1, 32 P. 1063, where it was decided that ... ...
  • Keil v. Grays Harbor & P. S. Ry. Co.
    • United States
    • Washington Supreme Court
    • November 22, 1912
    ... ... foreclosed by a long line of decisions, citing Hatch v ... Tacoma, O. & G. H. R. Co., 6 Wash. 1, 32 P. 1063; ... Kaufman v. Tacoma, O. & G ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT