The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1898-10-22
JUDD, CD, FREAR AND WHITING, j.


OPINION OF THE COURT WHITING. J.
This is an action brought by plaintiff woman, against
assumpst certain upon clam
for services work performed and also for had
and received
The plaintiff live with defendant his mistress, at
defendants request agreed that she should receive
profits arising from the dairy and stock business
carried by defendant and others The plaintiff performed
the domestic services that wife accustomed to perform
addition thereto did render services other
than and did work and labor for the defendant The
partnership with others who eventually
withdrew from the partnership and their withdrawal they
with defendant certain moneys for the Of the plaintiff
payment of their shares of the due to plaintiff for
work the dairy and stock business not domestic
These moneys defendant received and retained.
Before the opening of the the defendant had filed his
which general denial After the opening of the
trial, defendant filed amended
having obtained leave of At the trial the plaintiff
moved the to order the said amended to be stricken
from the files, which motion granted The defendant then
moved the for leave file the amended answer which
The defendant duly excepted both ru
ngs. The amended answer is as follows:
answering denies generally and specifically
every allegation plaintiffs complaint forth And the
defendant further answering denies that the day and in
the complaint alleged, the first of April 1898,
at any within years prior thereto prior to the
this action he indebted to defendant
in the sum in the of
eghy-four dollars for money lent advanced IN other
sum or sums money whatsoever and denies that the day
and year any within years prior thereto
prior the of this action he undertook or
promised plaintiff her said sum OF money OF promised OF
undertook pay money whatsoever and defendant
that any within six prior to said date he was
or now is or prior to the commencement of this action he
indebted plaintiff of hundred dollars for money
had and received Joseph and for the of plain
tiff or ever and denies that within years prior to said
date or prior of this action at
all the defendant promised undertook pay said
the plaintiff And defendant denies that said date IN the
complaint alleged is indebted plaintiff IN the sum of
Que hundred dollars for moneys received from Joaquin Lopez
or of money whatsoever and denies that
on day any within the thereto prior
10 the commencement the defendant undertook
promised to pay to plaintiff said of money any other
sum of money Wherefore defendant that he
ne hence dismissed without with his and disbursements
IN this behalf and the defendant hereby notice
that intends rely the fact of the 1legaly OF PLAN
f7s claim in his defense plaintiffs demand John Miguel
nv Paul Neumann and Hons attorneys for defendant
This amended answer signed by counsel for defendant but
Is not sworn to- nor any affidavit of merits accompanying
the motion allowance The defense set up therein III
the general ISSUE plea substantially OF the statute OF
limitations and notice intention rely upon the egay Of
plaintiffs claim. The defendants answer OF the general issue
was fled within the time allowed by law for answering to W.T.
within twenty days after service of The amended
answer filed four days after the opening OF the ten two
DAYS before and days after service of
The court was right striking the amended from
the files for standing part of the record unless
leave had been obtained Rule of the Circuit Court
Rules provides Whenever amendments IN the peadngs
allowed opposing party shall not thereby be entitled OF
RIGHT to continuance All peang may be amended before
fhe return day by filing the amended plea and furnishing the
adverse party copy thereof After the return day the