for Summary J. at 7. [I]t is of the highest importance that the public health shall be safeguarded by all proper means. It would be unreasonable to suppose that in the grant to the gas company of the right to use the streets in the laying of its pipes it was ever intended to surrender or impair the public right to discharge the duty of conserving the public health. The gas company did not acquire any specific location in the streets; it was content with the general right to use them; and when it located its pipes it was at the risk that they might be, at some future time, disturbed, when that state might require for a necessary public use that changes in location be made. New Orleans Gaslight Co. v. Drainage Com. of New Orleans, 197 U.S. 453, 25 S.Ct. 471, 473, 49 L.Ed. 831 (1905) (<HOLDING>). Washington law is consistent: The company’s
holding that the utility did not carry its burden of proof by merely opening its books to inspection holding that a landlords alleged threats that tenants who did not sign a lease would have to pay their own utility bills and be subject to future rent increases did not constitute a wrongful use of force or fear holding that requiring the utility to relocate its pipes at its own expense did not constitute a legal injury holding that as a general rule the prosecution is entitled to prove its case by evidence of its own choice holding that the lease at issue which set forth that the tenant may at its own expense make alterations and improvements did not require the lessee to make the improvements and that the alterations and improvements did not constitute the pith of the lease