title:
L Eisenbach, et al, Appellants, vs E H Hatfield, Appellee, Brief for Appellants.
title:
131
creator:
L. Eisenbach
creator:
J. S. Pierce
creator:
Edward Hoare
creator:
Samuel C. Wheelwright
creator:
Hugh Glenn, Jr.
creator:
Twyman O. Abbott
creator:
John Smith
creator:
John Doe
creator:
Richard Roe
contributor:
Calkins
contributor:
Shackleford
date:
1890-10
publisher:
Washington State Supreme Court
type:
Civil
subject:
Real Property
language:
eng
format:
application/pdf
description:
Prior History: Appeal from Superior Court, Pierce County.Suit for injunction brought by E. H. Hatfield against C. Eisenbach, J. S. Pierce, Edward Hoare, Samuel C. Wheelwright, Hugh Glenn, Jr., Twyman O. Abbott, John Smith, John Doe, and Richard Roe.After the complaint was filed, and a temporary order issued, plaintiff filed an amended complaint, which alleged, in substance, that he was the owner of certain upland bordering and abutting upon the high water mark of Puget Sound; that by reason of such ownership he was entitled to certain littoral rights in and to the shore opposite his lands, and that the appellants were occupying the shore opposite his land, and erecting structures and improvements thereon. Defendants filed an answer disclaiming any right or title to any land above high water mark, and alleging that the land occupied by them is part of the shore of Puget Sound, and that valuable improvements, in actual use for commerce, trade and business had been made upon said lands long prior to the passage of the tide lands act of March 26, 1890, and that said improvements were on March 26, 1890, and prior thereto, in actual use for commerce, trade and business, and that the defendants are the owners of and in possession of such improvements; and alleging the purpose of the appellants to erect on said shore conveniences for shipping, and that the plaintiff would have the right, in common with all other persons, and upon the same terms, to use such conveniences when erected; and denying that the plaintiff had been denied access from his lands to the navigable waters of Puget Sound for any purposes of commerce or navigation; and denying that the appellee has desired access to or egress from the waters of Puget Sound for any purpose of commerce or navigation; and alleging that the harbor lines have not been fixed opposite said lands, and that the lands have not been disposed of by the State of Washington; and denying that the appellants have wrongfully or unlawfully obstructed plaintiff's access to the navigable waters of Puget Sound. To this answer plaintiff demurred, on the ground that the same did not state facts sufficient, and this demurrer was sustained. Defendants declined to answer further, and a final decree of perpetual injunction was made, from which defendants appeal.
description:
Riparian Rights – Tide Lands – Wharves and Docks – Accretion – Injunction – The tide lands of the state of Washington belong to the state, which has full power to dispose of them subject only to the restrictions imposed by the constitutions of the state and of the United States; and no individual can claim any casement in, or impose any servitude upon, the tide waters of the state without the consent of the legislature.A riparian proprietor on the shore of the sea or its arms has no rights, as against the state or its grantees, to extend wharves in front of his land below high water mark.Under article 15 of the state constitution, requiring the legislature to provide for the appointment of a commission whose duty it shall be to locate and establish harbor lines in the navigable waters of all harbors of the state, wherever such navigable waters lie within or in front of the corporate limits of any city, or within one mile thereof; and, further, to provide general laws for the leasing of the right to buld wharves, docks and other structures upon certain designated areas, or to provide by general laws for the building and maintaining of wharves, docks and other structures upon such areas, a riparian proprietor within a mile of the corporate limits of any city has no right to extend wharves in front of his land below high water mark except by permission of the state.
description:
The act of the territorial legislature of 1854, authorizing bank owners to build wharves in front of their premises, was but a license and, until availed of, was revocable; and the constitution and subsequent laws have abrogated the act.The right of a riparian owner to future accretions to his land is not a vested right, as there can be no present vested right in that which may never have an existence.The building by the state or its grantees of wharves upon shores of navigable waters is neither a taking nor a damaging of private property for public use.A riparian proprietor cannot maintain injunction against the owners of valuable improvements in actual use for commerce, trade and business, made on tide lands in front of his premises prior to March 26, 1890, as, by the Laws 1889-90, p. 435, § 11, the owners of such improvements are given the exclusive right of purchase of the land so improved for a period of sixty days after their final appraisal by the state.
relation:
Eisenbach v. Hatfield, 2 Wash. 236 (1891)
relation:
26 P. 539
rights:
These materials are public records. Please see Washington State Court Rules: General Rules 31 for details https://www.courts.wa.gov/court_rules/pdf/GR/GA_GR_31_00_00.pdf