Legal Opinion · Dissent

Sundquist Homes, Inc. v. Snohomish County Public Utility District No. 1

Washington Supreme Court

Decided April 27, 2000No. 67715-8Published

1DissentSanders, J.

(dissenting) — The real issue in this case is whether the Snohomish County Public Utility District Number 1 (hereinafter PUD) may lawfully shift the cost of relocating PUD utilities on county road rights-of-way to adjacent private property owners. While the majority acknowledges no express legal authority justifies shifting these costs, it nevertheless infers an inherent power to do so. However such inference is improper because it directly conflicts with established common law principles, not to mention plain statutory language. I would therefore reverse the Court of Appeals and remand to…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Enterprise Leasing, Inc. v. City of TacomaWashington Supreme Court · 1999
  2. New York City Tunnel Authority v. Consolidated Edison Co. of New York, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1946
  3. General Telephone Co. of the Northwest, Inc. v. City of BothellWashington Supreme Court · 1986
  4. Pacific First Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n v. Pierce CountyWashington Supreme Court · 1947
  5. Hite v. Public Utility District No. 2Washington Supreme Court · 1989

10 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