Sopchak v. City of Tacoma, 26262.
| Decision Date | 25 March 1937 |
| Docket Number | 26262. |
| Citation | 189 Wash. 518,66 P.2d 302 |
| Parties | SOPCHAK v. CITY OF TACOMA. |
| Court | Washington Supreme Court |
Department 2.
Appeal from Superior Court, Pierce County; F. G. Remann, Judge.
Action by John Sopchak against the City of Tacoma. Judgment for defendant, and plaintiff appeals.
Affirmed.
P. L Pendleton and W. G. Palmer, both of Tacoma, for appellant.
Howard Carothers, Bartlet Rummell, and George F. Abel, all of Tacoma, for respondent.
This is an action sounding in tort brought against a city of the first class. The sole question presented on appeal is whether or not the claim filed by the appellant, as a condition precedent to bringing the action, complies with sections 9478-9480, Rem.Rev.Stat., and section 133 of the charter of the city of Tacoma.
Section 9478 requires claims sounding in tort against cities of the first class to be filed with the city clerk, in compliance with the charter provisions of such city, and to contain ' in addition to the valid requirements of such city charter relating thereto,' certain other data prescribed therein.
Section 9479 provides that such claims ' shall conform to and comply with such charter provisions.'
Section 9480 declares that compliance with sections 9478-9480 shall be mandatory.
Section 133 of the Charter of Tacoma reads, in part, as follows 'Such claim shall accurately state the time, place cause, nature and extent of the alleged damages and give the actual residence of the claimant by street and number at the date of presenting such claim, and for six months immediately prior to the time such claim for damages accrued, and shall be verified by affidavit of the claimant. * * *'
Appellant was injured on December 27, 1932. He filed his claim on January 25, 1933. In so far as it relates to residence, it reads as follows: 'I, the undersigned, John Sopchak, aver that I reside at 2547 South G. Street, Tacoma, Washington, and that I am a citizen of the State of Washington, and City of Tacoma, Washington; that I am thirty-two years of age, a single man, and have resided in Tacoma thirty-one years, having been born in Marinette, Wisconsin, September 4, 1900.'
The sole question presented, as now reduced and simplified, is: Does the claim give the residence of the claimant by street and number for six months immediately prior to the date such claim for damages accrued? The trial court held that it did not.
It is...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Duschaine v. City of Everett
...particular provisions of the charter on which it was based, will reveal a clear distinction, we believe, between that case and this. In the Sopchak case, the city charter provided that the 'shall * * * give the actual residence of the claimant by street and number at the date of presenting ......
-
Caron v. Grays Harbor County
...we have always proceeded upon the principle that there must be a substantial compliance with such requirements. Sopchak v. Tacoma, 189 Wash. 518, 66 P.2d 302; Duschaine v. Everett, 5 Wash.2d 181, 105 P.2d 130 A.L.R. 134, and cases therein cited. See, also, Johnson v. Seattle, 9 Wash.2d 231,......
-
Renner v. City of Marysville
...cannot be supplied by any method of construction, however liberal. Caron, 18 Wash.2d at 406, 139 P.2d 626 (quoting Sopchak v. Tacoma, 189 Wash. 518, 520, 66 P.2d 302 (1937)). Caron's claim did not substantially comply with the essential requirements of the statute because it provided no dat......
- In re Henry's Estate, 26331.