The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1898-10-15
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE HAWAIIAN
ISLANDS,
JUNE TERM, 1898.


EXCEPTIONS FROM CIRCUIT COURT, FIRST CIRCUIT.
SUBMITTED JUNE q, 1898 DECIDED OCTOBER 10, 1898.
JUDD, CD, FEEAE WHITING j.
Latitude allowed by the trial examination of witness
called by plaintiff the which tended the
Directing party prejudced thereby.
Where title
to description and holds adversely continuously openly and
acquired by him.
JUDD, j.
This action Of eectment tried the Circuit Court of
the First Circuit verdict therein rendered by the jury in
favor of defendants The plaintiff brings the
bill of exceptions comprising "A points The plaintiff
simple piece land possession of defendants
consisting of which he alleges be in Pahoa,
Waikiki Kona Island of Oahu, which he claims the defendants
have unustly and the rights of the plaintiff taken
into their possession conceded that plaintiff owned
the land of Pahoa' and defendant Beckey the land of Ka
uaoohe adjoining in which he alleges the land in dispute
and that he holds the by adverse 1t
coded that the certificate of boundaries by the
settling the boundaries of Paoa and that the
survey of the award of Kauaoohe incorrect also and it
did not close Mr. W. A WALL surveyor called for the plain
tiff testified that he abandoned the surveys and his best
judgment found line between the lands mentioned This
line brought the disputed territory within the land of Pahoa
1t contended that the Wall line would through
the question: Ordinarily persons divide their lands do
you find lands divided by lines that
patches, that there is imaginary line dividing aro
patch from yours that dividing the real patch that the
the may fall my lands and the other
leaf on yours!'
Also 'When they divide ancient land do you understand
they divide the land that the line through the middle of
patches? Both of these questions allowed to be
asked, under objection by plaintiffs counsel being incom
properly allowed subject of inquiry if
possible boundary of the lands. The
witness put his Judgment and experience question in
having settled in his mind the true line between them and IN
testing the accuracy of his judgment he asked ancient
through kao patches If they did not and
his did, then the probability of his line being the true
was lessened evidence also given by Mr. Wall the
dividing lands in ancient times think rel
question kuleanas being usually award
according the previous possession of the claimant This
dsposes exceptions and f. Exceptions g. = and
are by the of questions by de
PENDANTS counsel to the witness leckey
(defendan) who called by plaintiff lie was asked by
plaintiff if he was possession of the land involved in this
which included artesan WELL and he answered that he
He was by defendants counsel and test
fed AS having bought the land sixteen years from
one Koua and as knowledge of the length of his and
Koulas possession question to Beckey during this cross
examination objected by plaintiff and allowed Were
YOU informed lawsuit between Malta kahai and koua
in regard this piece of land! This Is exception o. The
plaintiff contends that the croexamnaton should have been
limited TO the and the ownership OF Beckey,
the onv question put the direct whether he
in possesson Whether the knowledge of Beckey of suit be-
tween the respective in title legitimate
nation it unnecessary decide since the OF Beck
lev was that he had heard of it when he bought OF kioua
therefore the plaintiff not thereby in ured
Exception is the allowance OF question on cross
of Beckey what place hloua pointed out to
him boundary between Pahoa and kauaoohe We do
understand that the object of this question was to prove the
actual boundary by hearsa Koua being alive but IN order to
show Beckey actually received possession of from hlou
This was This also dipoes of exceptions and s.
to the answer allowed made by Koua Bec which showed