The Hawaiian gazette. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1865-1918, 1888-04-10
Supreme Court. April Term, 1883.

Mr.. JUSTICE DOLE PRESIDING.
Court opened at 10 o'clock.
Motions and demurrers argued till
1855.
Oku VS.. Kaiaikawaha RepleviD.
Plaintiffs motion for continuance al
lowed to follow Kuanalewa VS.. Kipi.
Plaintiffs to pay costs of same.
KIM Kalo VS.. Keawe. Damage.
Transferred from Hawaiian jury calen-
dar to mixed jury.
Kanaloa vs.. Quinn. Ejectment.
Oral motion for change of venue to
Waimea, Hawaii, term, partly argued
and continued to the Sd.
Kanaloa VS.. Union Mill Co. Eject
ment. Oral motion for change of
venue to Waimea, Hawaii, term,
partly heard and continued to the Sd.
The King VS.. Nanheim and Murdoch.
Fast riding. Defendants motion for
withdrawal of appeal allowed, upon
their paying fines and costs.
Martin VS.. Kerr. Assumpsit. Mo
ton TO strike demurrer off files. Over
ruled.
Collector of Customs VS.. G. w. Mac
farlane & Co. Assumpsit. Attorney
General claiming that defendant is in
utldull III llOL ia illS hlCu dllShO4y
the Court ruled that defendant can
answer.
Collector of Customs VS.. H. r. Mac
farlane. Assumpsi' Attorney-Gener-
al claiming that defendant is in default
in not having filed answer, the Court
rules defendant can answer.
Perrett VS.. Kaa, appellant. Briefs
will be filed. No argument by agree
nient of counsel.
Keamalu VS.. Luhau. Eiectment.
Tried before a Hawaiian jury. Hatch
for plaintiff; Kinney for defendant.
TUESDAY, April Sd.
Keamalu VS.. Luhau and Manuia,
ejectment Tried before a Hawaiian
Jury. Unanimous verdict for plaintiff
for one-half of property. Hatch for
plaintiff; Kinney for defendant.
Kuanalewa VS.. Kipi, ejectment.
Tried before Hawaiian jury. Brown
for plaintiff; Kinney for defendant.
Plaintiffs claim that defendant has
taken into his possession certain real
property at Waipio, Eva, and describ-
ed in Royal Patent No. S07, L. G. A.
S,24l L. K, and to their damage in
the sum of $3.50. Partly heard, and
disposed of by plaintiff filing discon-
tinuance.
WEDNESDAY, April 4th.
Hawaiian jurors are excused until
notified to attend for mixed jury cases.
All Nee k VS.. Kealoha wv. Di-
vorce Magoon for plaintiff.
THURSDAY, April 5th.
The King vs.. Geo. Summers. Lar
ceny. Defendant is arraigned and
Il IL A
General for the Crown; defendant in
person.
Collector Of Customs VS.. w. S. Luce.
Assumpsit. DEFENDANTS demurrer is
argued and submitted Attorney
General for the Crown; Hartwefl,
Hatch and Whiting for defendant.
The King VS.. Lee Fook. Perjury,
second degree. DEFENDANTS arraigned
on an Indictment and counsel states
that he is not ready to plead as he will
file demurrer to the Indictment.
Deputy Attorney General for the
Crown; V. V. Ashford for defendant.
Collector of Customs vs. Geo. w.
Macfarlane ct al. Assumpsit. De-
PENDANTS demurrer and plaintiffs
motion for grounds of defendants de-
murrer are argued and submitted. At
torney-Generalf for plaintiff; Neumann
and Hatch for defendants.
Collector of Customs VS.. H. r. Mae
farlane. Assumpsit. Defendants de-
murrer and plaintiffs motion for
grounds of defendants demurrer are
argued and submitted. Attorney
General for plaintiff; Neumann and
Hatch for defendant.
FRIDAY, April 9Th.
IN BANCo.
Present-Chief Justice Judd, Asso-
ciate Justices McCully, Preston, Bick-
erton and Dole
Lunalilo Trustees VS.. Waihee Sugar
Co. called Mr. Justice Dole retired,
regarding himself, as one of the Trus-
tees, disqualified to sit upon the case.
Argued and submitted. Hartwell for
plaintiff; Hatch for defendant
After hearing of the above case, Mr.
Justice Dole returned to his place on
the bench.
The King VS.. Makuole Appeal
from Police Court, Hilo. The appeal,
not being properly brought under the
statute, is dismissed.
Tn Wo Sang & Co. VS.. Z. Alo and
All Wa. Bill for decree ordering ac-
ceptance of surrender and cancellation
of a certain lease of water rights, ETC.,
on Kauai Plaintiffs appeal from de-
cision of Justice Preston, March I'd, in
favor of defendants Hartwell for
plaintiff; Neumann for defendant.
Harriet Black ct al. VS.. Castle &
Cooke ct al. Submission under Sec
lions ll40, l14l, l142 and 1143 of the
Civil Code, as to whether an adoption
agreement is valid. Briefs agreed to
be filed are ordered filed by Friday, a.
M, 18th, or the case to be struck off
the calendar. A. c. Smith for plain
tiffs Rosa for defendants.
Bishop & Co. VS.. Pacific Navigation
Co. Bill for foreclosure and injunc-
ton. Plaintiffs appeal of Feb. 4th,
from the decision of Chief Justice
Judd of Jan. 3lst, vacating his decree
of nnn 10 1907 nlln1rinn dnfnnAn nt