State v. Superior Court for Ferry County

• Decision Date: 30 August 1928
• Docket Number: 20998.
• Citation: State v. Superior Court for Ferry County, 270 P. 104, 148 Wash. 680 (Wash. 1928)
• Court: Washington Supreme Court
• Parties: STATE ex rel. SHERMAN CREEK LAND & IRRIGATION CO. v. SUPERIOR COURT FOR FERRY COUNTY et al.

270 P. 104

148 Wash. 680

STATE ex rel. SHERMAN CREEK LAND & IRRIGATION CO. v. SUPERIOR COURT FOR FERRY COUNTY et al.

No. 20998.

Supreme Court of Washington

August 30, 1928

Department 2.

Writ of review by the State of Washington, on the relation of the Sherman Creek Land & Irrigation Company, against the Superior Court for Ferry County and others to review judgment allowing condemnation of property.Affirmed.

Alex.M. Winston, of Spokane, for relator.

Davis Heil & Davis, of Spokane, for respondents.

BEALS J.

Relator Sherman Creek Land & Irrigation Company, a corporation, in this proceeding seeks to review a decree of private necessity and judgment of appropriation entered by the superior court for Ferry county upon petition of Hedlund Lumber &amp Manufacturing Company, a corporation, the petitioner invoking the power of eminent domain in seeking to condemn what it alleges to be a private way of necessity across the lands of relator.The condemnation proceeding was instituted pursuant to chapter 133, Laws of 1913(page 412), being section 6747 et seq. of Remington's Compiled Statutes, and, after a lengthy hearing, resulted in a judgment in favor of the petitioner, adjudging that an occasion exists for the condemnation of a private way of necessity across relator's land for the purpose of constructing a logging railroad, appropriating land for the right of way, and directing that a jury be impaneled to determine the compensation to be paid to relator.A writ of review having been granted by this court upon relator's application, the record is now before us, and the question of the legality of the judgment of the trial court is presented for determination.

In the first place, relator contends that chapter 133, Laws of 1913 providing for the condemnation of private ways of necessity, is unconstitutional, being in violation of sections 3and16 of article 1 of the Constitution of the state of Washington, and also of section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.This precise question was submitted to this court in the case of State ex rel. White Pine Sash Co. v. Superior Court,143 Wash. 687, 255 P. 1025, involving the condemnation by this respondent of another tract of land as part of a comprehensive plan for the construction of its logging railroad, and the constitutionality of the act was upheld.On the authority of that case, and the cases upon which the decision was based, we hold that relator's contention that the act pursuant to which the...