The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1856-1888, 1881-08-13
SUPREME COURT.
July Term.

BEFORE Mr.. JUsrIcE JUDD.

Moses T. Heu -. Kaae (wJ and Kauakauui.
Eiectmeut Mr.. Preston for the plaintiff, Mr.. J.
l.. Raulukou for the defendants. This was a
dispute as to boundaries for slip o land, a. few
feet wide. A verdict for the defendants was
given, three juror dissenting
Moses T. Hen vs.. KekiPi and Kall. Mr.. Pres
ton for the plaintiff, Mr.. J.. L. Raulukou for the
defendants. Mr.. Preston opened his case and
called Makaaoa *. After examining this wit
ness the learned counsel asked for a non-suit,
which the Court granted.
TUESDAY. July 18th.
RukaPu W. w. MeapOno lw) ct al- This
was a question II title, and on the case being
called Mr.. Preston, counsel for defendants, init
mated that a confession Of title had been filed by
then. The Court ordered the confession 10 be
RENTED 10 the Court Of Equity. whence the Is
sue had been sent for trial by q Jury. NIr- :.
b. Dole for plaintiff.
:. X Unauua OK ~. KeapOokaIaui * This
case was brought by appeal from a decision by
Mr.. Justice Judd, sitting as Intermediary Judge
at Waialua. It was n dispute about some
oranges, the produce Of trees which the plain
tiff claimed to have a conveyance Of. Defend
ant pleaded that he had never signed the con-
veyance, which from the evidence appeared to
be literally the fact, as he authorized another
man to sign for him. When heard at Waialua
the Court held that the document was signed by
defendants wife, but not by defendant, and was
therefore invalid. On appeal Nr. r. F. Bicker-
ton appeared for the plaintiff and Messrs. Castle
Il Hatch for defendant. The jury brought in a
verdict for the plaintiff, damages one dollar.
Mr.. Castle excepted to the verdict.
Malta ct al. vs.. Keoni Kapu, Ejectment. In
this case the jury was waived. After examining
his witnesses Mr.. Castle, counsel for the
asked for and obtained a non-suit. Mr.. :. b..
Dole appeared for the defendant,
Hawai- ct al. ". Mauliawa and J.. p. Kama.
Another ejectment case in which the jury had
been waived. Mr.. Castle for plaintiff and Mr..
W. L. HoIokahiki for defendants. The evi-
dence disclosed the fact that the defendants de
rived their title from the same source Is the
plaintiffs. IL was then agreed on between cOun-
sci that they would examine the title deeds, and
agree what judgement should be entered mp
G.. X. Peni -. W. l.. HOlOkahiki. Action on
covenant. Mr.. Castle appeared for plaintiff,
and made a statement from the witness box, in
Producing the record of the case Harvey Is. Pc
NJ. Defendant, made n counter statement and
the Court reserved judgment.
WEDNESDAY,. July 18th.
AIona vs.. J, Kupau. Assumpsit for $3.50, for
money had add received. The jury was waived
Mr.. HartweIl for plaintiff. The claim was for rent
paid by AIOno in advance for land at Waialua,
IL AEa1E VI WAANA A@A 49, +-A%@r - NA
Court Of Equity. After hearing the facts the
Court took time to consider its decision.
Ulu vs.. POlani and Mana, Mr.. Castle raised
an objection to the hearing Of this appeal, on
the ground that il had not been taken within the
time allowed by the Statute. The Court decided
that the appeal could be perfected on the Mon
day, Sunday being the 10th day from the
date Of the decision. The hearing was post
Poned.
J.. p. Mendoza ". Kaaiahua. This was an
action on money expended on the construction
Of a dividing fence. Mr.. HartweIl, for defend
ant. put IN a demurrer and argued It. Mr.. Hatch
appeared for plaintiff and argued against the de-
murrer. The Court ruled against the first two
points Of the demurrer, but sustained the third,
on the ground that il was necessary to aver
that the assessment had been made by the Com
missioner. Mr.. Hatch then moved for leave to
amend the declaration, which the Court granted.
THE proceedings Of 18th and 18th July were
ported IN our issue Of 18th inst
SATURDAY, July 10th.
DrvoEcE CASES.
=. Aukai ~ ~. Ramehaiku (w.I The grount
of this suit was desertiOu- The Marshal had
been unable TO ind the respondent and the sta
tutory advertisements had been ordered ~ th'
April Term Of Court. Evidence that these hac
appeared duly. and other evidence on the east
having been taken. the Court granted q decree.
Mahiai X ~. Uianu wv Divorce sough'
ON the grouud Of desertiOn and adultery. o. HI,
respondent admitted the marriage. and that she
had deserted her husband 90 because she like
pleasure Inc decree was granted II appear
ING that the desertiOu had taken place 50 IA
back as 1871.
Kahawaii (w) ~. Ralaauala H. Mr.. W.
HoIokahiki appeared IL this case a. counsel fOl
the HbeIIant. The petition alleged the mauiag,
and the birth Of children, and that the respon
dent had contracted some disease which render
ed cohabitation impossible. The Court being o.
opinion that this was not a ground for divorce
refused q decree
J. F. Kaehu * vs.. wehuIaui W. Tn,
charges IN this case were desertiOn and adulte
~. MI. Holokahiki appeared for the petitioner
A decree was refused because the case had no
been brought within a year after the discovery