Stolting v. Kuykendall
Washington Supreme Court
1Per curiam
The appellants and one Brown made application to the department of public works for a certificate of necessity covering the public road from North Bend to the North Bend Timber Company’s Camp No. 15, in this state. After a hearing at which all parties were given ample opportunity to present testimony, the department granted a certificate to Mr. Brown.
*393Time and again we have held that we will not interfere with the action of the department of public works on matters of this nature unless its members have acted unfairly, arbitrarily or in disregard of the testimony. State ex rel. Great Northern…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- State ex rel. Great Northern Railway Co. v. Railroad CommissionWashington Supreme Court · 1910
- State v. Department of Public WorksWashington Supreme Court · 1924
- State ex rel. B. & M. Auto Freight v. Department of Public WorksWashington Supreme Court · 1923
- Northern Pacific Railway Co. v. Department of Public WorksWashington Supreme Court · 1923
- State ex rel. Great Northern Railway Co. v. Public Service CommissionWashington Supreme Court · 1914
3Cited by8 opinions
- Furstenberg v. Omaha & Council Bluffs Street Railway Co.Nebraska Supreme Court · 1937
- Burlington Transportation Co. v. Iowa State Commerce CommissionSupreme Court of Iowa · 1941
- In Re Application of W., C.F. N.R. Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1928
- Yelton & McLaughlin v. Department of Public WorksWashington Supreme Court · 1925
- Department of Transportation v. Snohomish CountyWashington Supreme Court · 1949
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.