The Hawaiian gazette., 1890-04-08
SUPREME COuRr,.-Ar CHAMBERS.
BEFORE HIS HONOR CHIEF JUSTICE JUDD
MONDAY, Mar. 81.


RrroRE HIS HONOR CHIEF JUSTICE JUDD.
MONDAY, Mar. 81.
Intermediary Division. The King VS..
A Wansev. Malicious injury and mis-
chief by throwing stones at Gordon
setter dog, breaking one oil its fore legs
in two places, and knocking out some of
its teeth. Appeal from the Police Court,
Honolulu, where the defendant was fined
sl5 and costs. His Honor's decision
concludes as follows:
.sWhile | would excuse the throwing
of the first stone as most natural and
common method OF Fastening the exit OF
such an intruder, the throwing OF the
second stone while the dog was brought
TO a standstiil at the fence through which
ne could not escape, was unjustihable
and shows statutory malice. The con-
viction and sentence OF the Police Court
is affirmed with costs" {. Creighton
for the Crown; W. \. Whiting for de-
PENDANT.
BEFORE HIS HONOR JUSTICE NJ GULLY.
Kaekowaha ct al. VS.. q. Ukuu. In
equity. Plea in bar Argued and deci-
sion reserved. c. Creighton for plaintiff;
A. Rosa for defendant.
supreme Court-In Banco.
BEFORE HIS HONOR CHIEF JUSTICE JUDD,
JUSTICE M'CULLY AND JUSTICE BIcK-
ERToN.
TUESDAY. April L
Pilipo Holi VS.. l.. II. Stolz. Criminal
conversation Exceptions from fourth
Judicial Court. Argued and submitted.
A. Rosa for plaintiff; w. o. Smith and
C Creighton for defendants.
Lee Ahlo vs.. Aiau. Ejectment Ex-
ceptious from decision of Chief Justice
Judd. Argued aud submitted. w. X.
Castle for plaintiff; S. X. Kane for de-
PENDANT.
q. w. C. Jones VS.. Samuel Norris.
'Assumpsit. Exceptions from decision of
Chief Justice Judd. Argued and sub
mitted. w. 0. Smith for plaintiff; F.
NJ Hatch for defendant.
Supreme Court-At Chambers.
THURSDAY, April 3
DECISION BY JUSTICE M'CULLY.
Jas. w GAY VS.. J.P. Mendonca. Appeal
from the Police Court, Honolulu. The
plaintiff claims in assump sit $3.50 with
interest for a survey and map made by
him for the defendant Several circum-
stances have contributed to the misun-
Outstanding OF the parties in the case,
and render il not easy to form decision
on uncontradicted testimony. The plain
tiff is a professional surveyor. He is
also the lessee from the defendant of a
large tract of land at Mokuleia, Waialua,
Oahu. From this tract, 200 acres OF lice
land was reserved for the defendant, the
lessor, and the lease guaranteed that
there was $50 acres of rice land for the
lessee.
The surveying had two objects to
accomplish, the setting off of 200 acres
suitable for rice planting for the defen-
dant, and the ascertaining OF $50 acres
of rice land for the plaintiff. The plain
tiff held by his lease a large area Of graz
ing land which does not come into this
controversy The plaintiffs contention
is that he agreed to make free OF charge
a survey of all the rice land; that ne did
survey it, making q finished map which
was lost in the wreck OF the schooner
Ehukai. H. offers an outline sketch
made from his notes, giving the total
area as marked by the defendant of 332
acres. He contends that the defendant
subsequently solicited and employed him
to survey the 200 acres reserved to him
self. This he did and charges him $3.50
for it.
The defendants contention is that the
second map was a completion of or in
pursuance of what the plaintiff had
agreed to do without charge, it being
something of interest to himself. Neither
map was accepted The defendant en-
ployed another surveyor, and the con-
troversy respecting the plaintiffs guar
anteed $50 acres was carried into the
Supreme Court.
The decision concludes as follows: 81
am of opinion that the plaintiff has not
herein made a satisfactory affirmative
case. My judgment affirming the Court
below is for the defendant"
BEFORE BIS HONOR CHIEF JUSTICE JUDD.
SATURDAY, April 5.
Intermediary Division. KaiIiahi wv
V. Kepau. Replevin. Plaintiffs appeal
from Police Court, Honolulu. Argued
and decision reserved A. Rosa for
plaintiff, W. G. Achi for defendant,