XXXX
XXXX
XXXX
XXXX
XXXX
XXXX
XXXX
XXXX
XXXX
XXXX
XXXX
XXXX
XXXX
XXXX
Website Navigation
The Issues
and
Proposed Solutions
( Website Homepage )
Understand the ELS Federal Tax Fraud Scheme
Legal Opinions and
Documents related to the
ELS Tax Fraud Scheme
Chronological List of
Website Documents
Washington State
Precedential
Railroad Right-of-Way
Opinions Thru Brown

Footnotes

Washington State Appeals Court, Division One

KING COUNTY, Appellant, v. SQUIRE INVESTMENT CO., ET AL, Respondents.
[No. 25057-4-I. Division One. December 20, 1990.]



1. See also 4 J. Grimes, Thompson on Real Property SS 1849, at 371 (1979 repl.) ("Where land is conveyed to a railroad company for a right-of-way, such conveyance, though in the form of a warranty deed, is generally construed as passing an easement or right-of-way only, is limited to that use, and must revert to the owner of the fee when the use is abandoned.") (Footnote omitted.); 3 H. Tiffany, Real Property SS 772, at 232 (3d ed. 1939) ("However, a grant of a right of way to a railroad company does not usually convey a fee, but an easement only.') (Footnote omitted.); Annot., Deed to Railroad Company as Conveying Fee or Easement, 6 A.L.R.3d 973 (1966).

2. 37 Wn.2d 533, 225 P.2d 199 (1950).

3. The respondent in Swan, at 534, conveyed the property "for the purpose of a Railroad right-of-way . . .". (Italics omitted.) Unlike the instant case, there were no "magic" words in the deed suggesting a fee was created.

4. 152 Wash. 562, 574-75, 278 P. 686 (1929).

5. 92 Wn.2d 570, 599 P.2d 526 (1979).

6. See also Roeder Co. v. Burlington Northern, Inc., 105 Wn.2d 567, 571, 716 P.2d 855 (1986) (railroad right of way reverts to reversionary interest holders when a railroad company abandons a line).

7. 107 Wn.2d 444, 730 P.2d 1308 (1986).

8. 111 Wn.2d 727, 765 P.2d 257 (1988).

9. Miotke v. Spokane, 101 Wn.2d 307, 338, 678 P.2d 803 (1984).

10. State v. Evans, 96 Wn.2d 119, 634 P.2d 845 (1981).

11. Travis v. Washington Horse Breeders Ass'n, Inc., 111 Wn.2d 396, 410, 759 P.2d 418 (1988); Nordstrom, Inc. v. Tampourlos, 107 Wn.2d 735, 744, 733 P.2d 208 (1987); Boeing Co. v. Sierracin Corp., 108 Wn.2d 38, 66, 738 P.2d 665 (1987).

12. See State v. Buckley, 18 Wn. App. 798, 572 P.2d 730 (1977) (condemnees were not entitled to an award under RCW 8.25.070, which applies if a trial is held to fix compensation for condemned property, because they had waived trial and accepted the amount offered by the State).

13. 96 Wn.2d 119, 634 P.2d 845 (1981).

14. 94 Wn.2d 479, 618 P.2d 67 (1980).

15. The general standards for awarding attorney fees are applicable. The County's contention that the fees must be limited to a percentage of the $100,000 increase over the highest settlement offer is completely meritless.

16. 105 Wn.2d 567, 716 P.2d 855 (1986).