The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1898-06-13
SUIT MILL NOT STOP WORK
INJUNCTION AGAINST FIRST AVE-
NuE REGR.DE NOT GENERAL
~ r. H~msn Calls in Question VALID
tty of Appr.tsc mt anA Aware
of Damages tn fsis Property Only
claims Procedure Was Irregular

TIE suit oe r. p KEENAN, against the
city aid Contractor Smart, 30 eajoin tue
regarding Of First avenue. a hr1se MA
ton cf which WIS made IN the Pose-Tntei-
si5sacer yesterday El1raiRy. VIII rot; ac-
cerd.ng TO the statements Of tire case
ferday by Assistant Corporation Coansei
Won Tobe9. have the effect of stopping the
work on the whole street: nor docs Mr.
Won Tobei think THAI the proceedings
taken by the city council to appraise ard
award damages TO property owners along
the street viii be found 20 have been t.
legal when the question IL tried before
Judge Moore. The claim Is made by He
mans lawyers. BaIilnger. Ronald & Bat
tie. however. in their complaint for an
injuaetion. that the appraisement proceed
ings are absolutely invalid and were made
under law no longer In force. On this
ground an injunction Is asked and the city
has been ordered TO refrain from grading
the street In front OF Heman's property,
pending the hearing OF the application.
which VIII be had this morning before
Judge Moore.
Mr.. Won Tobei states that when the last
city council rasssd the ordinance proyid-
ing for the regarding OF FIRST avenue q
second ordinance was passed, under the
legislative act OF 1888 providing for the sp-
praLsensn Mt Of damages I'm such CASES ais-
pointing three appraisers who afterward
made and filed their appraisement and
award Of damages. BY them Herman was
awarded si1a To compensate him for the
expense of lowering his building. the old
Half Way house" to conform to the new
grade In nearly all cases. the property
owners along the street were satisfied with
the work OF the appraisers and settled with
the city upon the basis of the appraisa-
ment. Heman was one OF the few who
had out for more. It was his claim,
which he reasserts in his Injunction com
paint. that he will be damaged at least
s7p9 by the regarding Of the street.
The refusal Of the city TO allow this
amount led 70 the suit by Hsman. who
alleges in the complaint that the act OF
ISs3 was entirely abrogated by an act or
the legislature of 1883 providing a course
Of procedure for the condemnation of pri-
vate property for public use, and further
alleges that the city should have proceed
cd under the later act.
Ha alleges that under the act of 1883 he
was given TO notice OF the c.ty's intentions
and was not heard TO object To the APP
pF#tSN{i1st. iEbSF the act oi 1888, ne di-
leses. such an opportunity would have been
afforded him. Under the later act a suit
for the condemnation is brought and dam
ages awarded after a trial by jury,
Mr. Won Tobel states that IL MIR Henan
had chosen. he could have taken an APP
peal 10 the superior court from the award
of the appraisers and thus obtained jury
trial of the question u dana ges.
The act Of 1883. Mr.. Won Tobel thinks,
being a special act providing for the re
grading Of streets was not repealed by the
act Of 1888. which Is q general ACT for al
condemnation purposes, and the question
whether the earlier act is, or IL not, still IN
effect is the one which the court VIII Try.
Even should a temporary injunction be
granted Herman. the regarding elsewhere
than in froat of Henans' property. VIII not
be Interrupted.