Ettor v. City of Tacoma

Background

Owners of property next to a Tacoma street sued after cuts and fills made under the city’s direction for an original grading damaged their land. Washington had passed laws (1893, reenacted in 1907) that, as the state court had interpreted them, required cities to compensate abutting owners for damage caused by original street grading. While these suits were pending, the legislature amended the law in 1909 to say the compensation requirement would not apply to original gradings. The trial court directed a verdict for the city, and the Washington Supreme Court affirmed, treating the plaintiffs’ right as purely statutory and ended by the repeal.

Reasoning

The main question was whether the obligation to pay, created when the damage occurred while the law was in force, became a vested property right that a later repeal could not destroy. The opinion explains that the 1893 and 1907 acts imposed an obligation on the city to make compensation — a substantive right that vested once the damage happened. The Court rejected the idea that repeal of the statute could retroactively erase that vested claim, distinguishing ordinary changes to procedural remedies or general policy from actions that would deprive a person of a fixed property right.

Real world impact

Because the owners’ right to compensation vested when their property was damaged, later repeal cannot defeat their claims. Property owners keep their suits for damages; cities cannot nullify past liabilities simply by changing the law later. The Supreme Court reversed the state-court rulings and remanded the cases for further proceedings to determine and enforce the proper compensation.