Legal Opinion

Nelson v. City of Seattle

Washington Supreme Court

Decided December 14, 1934No. 25136. Department TwoPublishedCited by 19 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBlake, J.

This litigation arises out of what is popularly known as the second Denny hill regrade, in Seattle, being specifically described as local improvement district No. 4818. Generally speaking, the improvement consisted of the removal of the remainder of Denny hill which had not been included in the first regrade. Particularly, the plans called for the regrading of streets to a new datum, the laying of water mains and sewers, paving of alleys, and the paving, side-walking and curbing of streets.

Bids were called for upon the project in its entirety. The plaintiff herein, George Nelson, was the…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Ehrenworth v. . Stuhmer Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1920
  2. Cahill v. EastmanSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1872
  3. Wright v. City of TacomaWashington Supreme Court · 1915
  4. Parks v. ElmoreWashington Supreme Court · 1910
  5. Lloyd v. American Can Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1924

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by19 opinions

  1. Continental Casualty Co. v. SchaeferCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1949
  2. Olander Contracting Co. v. Gail Wachter InvestmentsNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2002
  3. Hellbaum v. Burwell & MorfordCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1969
  4. Schreiner Farms, Inc. v. American Tower, Inc.Court of Appeals of Washington · 2013
  5. Avalon Pacific-Santa Ana, L.P. v. HD Supply Repair & Remodel, LLCCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2011

14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API