Legal Opinion
Olympic Pipe Line Co. v. Thoeny
Court of Appeals of Washington
Decided November 23, 2004No. 31613-7-IIPublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
¶1
Quinn-Brintnall, C.J.
— Property owners appeal a superior court order condemning a portion of their property in favor of Olympic Pipe Line Company under RCW 81-.88.020 and chapter 8.20 RCW. They contend that the trial court erred in denying their motion to dismiss Olympic’s action because Olympic’s statutory authority violates *384article I, section 16 of the Washington Constitution.1 Correspondingly, they argue that the trial court erred in dismissing their inverse condemnation and trespass claims and in denying them interest on their stipulated damages and attorney fees.
¶2 We hold that RCW…
2Cases cited45 opinions
- Orion Corporation v. StateWashington Supreme Court · 1987
- Smith v. KingWashington Supreme Court · 1986
- Sintra, Inc. v. City of SeattleWashington Supreme Court · 1997
- State v. CostichWashington Supreme Court · 2004
- Bodin v. City of StanwoodWashington Supreme Court · 1996
40 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Sanders v. City of SeattleWashington Supreme Court · 2007
- Olympic Pipe Line Co. v. ThoenyCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2004
- Marshall v. Thurston CountyCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2011
- CITY OF PUYALLUP v. HoganCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2012
- City of Puyallup v. HoganCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2012
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.