The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1898-02-11
SUBMITTED DECEMBER 20, 1897.
OPINION OF THE COURT BY FREAR. ].

The petitioner, Ahn infant by Lyle A. Dckey his
friend, brought in the District Court of Honolulu.
The Magistrate issued in each the usual form
signed by himself Upon the day. said Ahn and said
Dckey being present. the defendant in the Tai
On asked for continuance for week which the Magistrate
granted On the day which the continued Ahin
and Dckey being present. the Magistrate of his motion
and without claim finding that the suits not for the
best interests of said Ahn that they instituted without
his that said Dcey fit person bring them
declined hear and determine hem the ground that said
Dckey duly authorized therein friend
perempory writ of mandamus is prayed for commanding
the Magistrate to hear and determine the actions.
The main contention of The Magistrate that District Magi
rae has no authority to permit an action to be brought IN his
for infant by his FRIEND and that such permission
be granted only by Circuit Judge Supreme Court
Justice
Rule 10 of the Circuit Courts that No process shall issue
the petition of the friend of any having
guardian except by leave of Court of Judge thereof
applies onlo proceedings in the Circuit Courts before Cir
cult Judges Even it applied actions in District Courts
would prevent District Magistrates from granting the eave
mentioned
Section 1862, Civ L. provides Nothing in this chapter
shall impair affect the power of any Judge of the Supreme
Court Circuit Court to appoint guardian to defend the
interests of minor implicated in such Court interested in
any suit matter there pending their power appoint
allow next friend for minor pro
defend any suit in his behalf" This section of the
chapter which formerly provided for the appointment of
guardians by Judges of the Supreme and Circuit now
Judges of the Circuit Courts only It's object provide
that such Judges might appoint by implication that other
Judge Magistrate should appoint guardian I'D Hten
next friend but merely guard against the possibility that the
provisions for the appointment of probate guardians by the
Supreme and Circuit Court Judges night be construed pro
hb the appointment by those Judges of guardians ad i
next friends The grant the power of appoint
ing guardian nd ite friend conne certain
Judges but make clear that such power already
was not intended to be taken away
The appointment of a guardian dd itena a next friend
naturally belongs the in which he act He
gaded officer of such court and such him
for proper and appoint another We have
statute forblddng the appointment of guardian 0d em
next friend by District Magistrate ''The power appoint
procheln ami like the power to appoint guardian ad tem
inherent every court including justices of the peace
Woemer, Guardianship Ga 1t may be better practice obtain
formal order admitting friend prosecute, but this
absolutely essential 1t sufficient if the recognizes
the next friend and does dissent Sick Mich Aid ASSN
40 Mich 80 The main thing to have the leave sanction
of the court This may be shown by the courts entertaining
the action It's earlier stages by ordering issuing process
was done by the Magistrate in this Est Of KeaahOnu
Iaw 80 The Magistrate apparently under the impress
sion that the question usdcona and that until the
friend obtained formal appointment by the proper Court
Judge he could entertain jurisdiction Failure obtain
appointment leave formal informal would be but
an irreguary. Fezlors Nirer, IS Wend $685. Kearney
4. DOYLE % Mich 294.
peremptory writ of mandamus issue prayed for No
costs to be taxed to either party.
H. A. Dickey for applicant.
AH0fney- General W. O. Smith, contra