The San Francisco call., 1896-03-13
1t Contained the Gist of the
Hawaiian Company's
Litigation.
RIGHTS OF FOREIGN COURTS.
When All Parties Are Citizens of
This State Suits Cannot Be
Brought Elsewhere.

The demurrer submitted by c. A. Spreck-
els to the complaint of Claus Spreckels has
been overruled and his motion to dissolve
the temporary injunction issued by Judge
Bahrs and to strike out certain portions of
the complaint have been denied.
The suit of Claus Spreckels grew out of
an action brought in the courts of Hawaii
by the Hawaiian Commercial and Sugar
company, which is a California corpora
ton doing business in Hawaii, against
Claus Spreckels. The suit was for decla-
ration of trust regarding certain property
owned by Mr.. Spreckels in the island of
Maui and for the conveyance of that prop
erty to the corporation. 1t was claimed by
the corporation that the land owned by
Mr.. Spreckels had been acquired by him
while he was one of its officers and that he
held it in trust for the corporation.
As soon as this suit was brought to the
notice of Mr.. Spreckels in this City he con-
suited his attorneys, Delmas & Shortridge,
and for him they began suit here against
the Hawaiian Commercial and Sugar Com
pany and Russell J. Wilson, Mountford S.
Wilson, Charles S. Wheeler, Rudolph
Spreckels and B. J. Hoffacker the direct
ors. of the company, denying all of the
claims of the company regarding the land
IN Hawaii and asking for an injunction re-
stralning them from proceeding in the
suit in Hawaii on the ground that the
suit there had been brought al the instance
and request of c. A. Spreckels, who, it
was alleged, is the real controller of the
Hawaiian Commercial and Sugar Com
pany.
1t was alleged in the com plaint that the
suit in Hawaii had been brought in fur
therance ola systematic plan by which c. A.
SpreckelS has Tor years annoyed his father,
Claus Spreckels. 1t was further urged
that it was iniQuitous for citizens of this
State TO ATTEMPT to drag another citizen OF
this State into a foreign jurisdiction to
answer 10 suit which must ultimately be
determined by the laws of the place of
residence of all parties and where all of
the contracts and obligations, if any, we're
entered into by Claus Spreckels. 1t was
also alleged that Claus Spreckeis could not
by any process of the courts of Hawaii
procure the testimony which would be
necessary in his defense to be given in the
foreign courts, and that all OF the testi-
mony could be given in the courts here.
OniNovember q Judge Bahrs issued an
iniU,ction as prayed for and then the de-
PENDANTS demurred and moved to strike
out various parts of the complaint and to
dissolve the injunction granted by Judge
Bahrs.
These motions raising, as they did, only
issues OF law, were afterward very fully
argued by G. S. Wheeler for the defendants
and D. NJ. Delmas for the plaintiff. On
the part of the defendant it was contended
that as the land which was sought to be
recovered was in Hawaii the suit was
properly brought there, and that section
3423 of the Civil Code of this State, which
declares that an injunction shall not be
granted to stay proceedings in another
court which have already been COM
menced prohibited the courts here from
enjoining the defendants from continuing
in their proceedings in Hawaii.
J., h. ~o1a3 ,+,ff ed
that it made no difference where the land
in question was situated. our own courts
had the power to require citizens of this
State to do all things necessary to protect
the rights of other citizens of this State,
even to compelling the transfer of land.
and further that no citizen should in good
conscience be permitted to bring vexatious
suits in foreign courts which could be
better brought and more advantageously
tried in the courts of this State. AS to the
claim that the court was denied jurisdic-
ton by the provision of the Civil Code,
the plaintiff urged that the constitutional
provision, which gives to the Superior
courts of this State jurisdiction III all
cases in equity, was above any provision
which the Legislature could make; that
the constitutional provision had been ex-
pressly declared by the Supreme Court of
this State to give the Superior courts ex-
actly the same jurisdiction that was
in England at the time OF the adoption
of the constitution; that the High Court
of Chancery had always restrained citizens
of England from prosecuting iniquitous
suits against other citizens in foreign
courts; that this practice had been
adopted by the courts of the United States
and of the various States of the Union,
and that on general broad equity prin-
ciples the power was in the courts of this
State to project its citizens from wrongs
on the part of other citizens, no matter
whether those wrongs were committed
here or committed elsewhere.
Judge Trout in his decision yesterday
morning decided atthe plaintiff was right
in all of his contentious, and that the de-
PENDANTS as matter of law had no right
to require him to go two-thousand miles to
answer their alleged claims against him.
This means that the rights of the parties
to the suit will be tried here, where all of
the parties live and where all of the obli-
cations arose.
In the Superior Court of the City and County
of San Francisco. State of California, Depart
ment g. Hon. JAMES NJ TROUT, Judge.
CLAUS SPRECKELs, Plaintiff
Vs.
HAWAIIAN COMMERCIAL AND SUGAR COMPANY Ia
corporation), RUSSELL j. WILSON, MOUNT
rom s. WILSON, CHARLES s. WHEELER, RU-
DoLPH SPRECKELs and b. J. HoFFAcRER, De-
fendants.
NJ
CRY c. EARL and C. S. WHEELER, Attorneys for
Defendants.
THE blaintif, Claus Spreckels, seeks to OBJ
tain q decree of court enjoining the defendant
CORPORATION tHawaiian Commercial and Sugar
Com mpany) and its directors from prosecuting
tho corporation's action which was commenced
on October l. $685. and is now pending in the
circuit Court of the First Judicial Circuit OF
the republic OF Hawaii.
The complaint subs tantially alleges as fol-
/ That the defendant corporation (created
and existing under the laws OF California; be-
gan its suit in the Hawaiian republic ior the
alleged purpose of obtaining decree OF court
declaring said Claus Spreckels 10 De trustee
to the said corporations use OF the lee simple
of about 5000 acres OF land situate on tne
island of Maui, in said republic, ana directing
him to execute and deliver 10 said corporation
a deed of said property, and also to account
for and pay over 10 it money received by
him as rent issues and profits thereof since
the time when he acquired title thereto.
Points in the Corporations Complaint.
Q. That writ of injunction was duly issued
commanding said Claus Spreckels to refraln
from selling or incum bering the aforesaid iano
g. That no process has been served IN SAID
suit.
a. That said corporation alleged in its COM
plant: ,-o