Legal Opinion

City of Bellevue v. Underwood

Washington Supreme Court

Decided April 12, 1962No. 36111PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtFoster, J.

The appellant landowner appeals from a judgment in an eminent domain proceeding. The one valid assignment of error is to a finding of fact 1 respecting damages.

Cutting through a ponderous maze of confusing, bewildering and wholly irrelevant details, the record shows that the appellant owned commercial property in Bellevue which was improved by a supermarket. Upon acquisition of the property, appellant likewise acquired a nonexclusive easement over an adjacent private street which, at the time of trial, had been improved by blacktopping. It is used by the customers of the supermarket and…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Boston Chamber of Commerce v. City of BostonSupreme Court of the United States · 1910
  2. Tanner v. Provo Bench Canal & Irrigation Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1911
  3. Boston Chamber of Commerce v. City of BostonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1907
  4. Miller v. GeraniosWashington Supreme Court · 1959
  5. Scroggin v. WorthyWashington Supreme Court · 1957

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Malstrom v. KallandWashington Supreme Court · 1963
  2. United States v. 10.0 Acres, Etc., and 33.4 Acres, Etc., Gesford P. Wright and Marie R. WrightCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1976
  3. Shields v. GarrisonCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1998
  4. United States v. Certain Land in CookDistrict Court, D. Minnesota · 1965
  5. Malstrom v. KallandWashington Supreme Court · 1963

4 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