The Yesler Estate Land Dispute
The Supreme Court rejects a claim for ten acres of land promised as a bonus for building a cable car line.
The story, cleaned up
A cleaned-up reading of the newspaper page: spelling and layout repaired, one story lifted off a crowded page. It follows the original closely but it is not a transcription. The original page is below; read it if a detail matters.
The supreme court filed a decision today in the case of Junius and Carrie A. Rochester vs. the estate of Sarah B. Yesler and Freeman P. Kirkendall. The action was brought to compel the administrator to execute a deed for ten acres promised by Sarah B. Yesler in 1887 to J. B. Metcalfe and associates as a bonus for constructing a cable road from Elliott Bay to Lake Washington. The court ruled that the alleged contract fell within the statute of frauds because it did not specify the land and was not supported by possession prior to Mrs. Yesler’s death. Testimony proved construction did not begin until months after she died. The case was ordered dismissed.
“The court holds that the alleged contract of July 30, 1887, does not constitute a written contract to convey any particular land and that it falls within the statute of frauds.”
Land disputes involving the Yesler estate were common in Seattle’s early development era. This ruling highlights the legal complexities that occurred when early 'booster' promises for transit infrastructure met the reality of probate and property law.
From readers
No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.