The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1856-1888, 1881-05-07
Supreme Court of the Hawaiian Islands
In Banco.-Aprl Term, 1881.
SATURDAY, APRIL BOTH.
BEFORE THE FULL COURT.

In re Chow Bick Git ct al. Petition of Habeas
Corpus. This was the case of passengers by the
Septima in which an appeal had been made from the
decision of the Chief Justice. The appeal was dis
missed. Their Honors each stated reasons for con
curing in this decision, which will be found at full
length in the present issue of the ADVERTISER.
Presentation to the Library. The Court called
the attention of members of the Bar to a present of a
valuable collection of law books which Mr.. j. NJ.
Davidson had made to the Supreme Court Law
Library,
Giles VS. Giles. Mr.. Justice McCully intimated
that be would by arrangement with the Chief Justice
take over this case and hear it during the coming
week as of the term.
Waikane vs Poohelo Ell al Ia this appeal case the
Court rendered judgment for the plaintiff.
Kate Paiko VS. J. NJ. Kapena. Mr.. Justice Judd
delivered the decision of the Court TO the effect that
&c as the use of the lane is permissive, the defendant
may revoke it, and obstruct the lane, but only on
his own land. Costs were ordered TO be divided
between the parties.
Auhia (w) VS. Kaiap aelna *. Libel for Divorce.
Mr.. Hartwell counsel for the libellan moved to
have Kaiapeelua held to be in contempt of the Court
for not having compiled with the order made on
18th of April, that he should pay into Court $50
for counsei's fee and S37 for cost of Court. Kai-
apeelua was in Court and stated that he could not
pay because he had no money, but that as he was
working for the Honolulu Iron Works Company. he
hoped to be able to pay soon. The Court granted
him till 10th May to make the payment with the
alternative VI DSIbS SCub " pllSOb'
Hofschlaeger s. Co. VS. Han Sam ct al. In this
case Mr.. Hartwell contested the right of the plain
tiff TO amend his declaration. Mr.. Justice McCully
said that his decision had been that the demurrer
was sustained and that the plaintiff could ament
upon payment of costs of the demurrer. The Court
sustained this decision. Mr.. J. NJ. Davidson ap-
peared for the plaintiff.
BEFORE Mr.. JUSTICE MCCULLY.
]. NTH VS. Wo San. Ejectment. Mr.. Bickerton
ss counsel for plaintiff accepted the value put
upon the dover by the Court and asked for judy
ment. The Court required that all the parties to
the suit should likewise agree before entering jndg
ment, and Mr.. Hatch for the defendants said that he
thought the parties could agree among themselves,
but that each party ought to pay his own costs.
L. G.. Sresovich & Co VS. NJ. McInerny. His Honor
read his decision as to the fees to be paid to the
Referees, reducing them to S15 each. Mr.. Bickerton,
the referee appointed by The Court, was present aud
argued against the decision. His Honor promised
not again to impose such unremuneratiye duties on
the learned gentleman.
BEFORE THE FULL COURT.
Agnew VS. McWayne. Mr.. Preston moved for
Judgment on the ground that the defendants ap-
peal had not been perfected. After some discussion the
Court decided to hear Mr.. Jones on his exceptions
at once. When Mr.. Preston rose to reply to Mr.. Jones
their Honors intimated that they had no occasion tC
hear him and gave judgment, over-ruling exceptions
Mcguire VS. The Union Fire and Marine Insurance
Company Of New Zealand. The executions TO the
verdict and ruling Of the Court In this matter were
argued pro and con by Mr.. Preston and Mr.. Hlrtwell
Judgment reserved.
s. Aukai VS. Kamehaiku. Divorce case. The
Marshal had in this case made a return that the
summons could not be served, Kamehaiku having
left Waimea 9 years ago, and her VIII, reabouts beinp
unknown. Mr.. Justice McCully ordered publication
of the summons, returnable at the July ~sittings Of
the Court.