The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1898-06-17

painans said crossing; So complainant
viii be irreparably njued that complainant has plain,
speedy adequate and efficient remedy law that WILL but
for relief in equity be compelled institute divers actions
law w.t. eiectment the lands unlaw
fully occupied by defendant actions for damages for the various
and continuing passes maintaining defendants track and
actions for damages interfering with compliments said track
and crossing if defendant shall do So.
The prayers the bill are % for an injunction
ing defendant from removing portion of compliments said
extension of its track interfering with said crong CD
for decree commanding defendant quit and surrender all
its track laid compliments lands and adudgng the
be fixture; CD for damages for the alleged trespasses
Defendant demurred the bill following grounds
4. That it as required by the rules of this
Honorable Court.
%. That the therein stated do not constitute cause
of action
50. That said complaint that any eparable
injury Is threatened to the plaintiff.
q. That the complaint ambiguous, unntelligible
uncertain.
IS. That the plaintiff has plain adequate and complete
remedy at law.
IS, That several of action have been improperly
united
=. That perpetual injunction is sought where there is "a
controversy the legal rights.
8 That it appears by the bill that plaintiff seeking,
an injunction against a defendant in possession
The Circuit Judge demurrer and dismissed the
bill; from his decree the complainant appeals
The relief prayed second and third PRAYERS above
set forth IS such would ordinarily naturally be sought
through actions at aweectment tespass this were the
only relief sought it is clear that the bill be sustained
There would be plain adequate complete remedy at law
If equity could entertain bill such relief primarily for
what relief could not entertain bill? What would be left
exclusively for the law courts?
1t is equally clear that cannot be sustained to avoid
multiplicity of suits single eecen and for mesne
profits with possibly second of trespass for tearing up
the track would seem to be all that would be required law
sandea for
matter Certainly showing is made that a multiplicity of
SUITS that phrase understood equity would be necessary
II this IS case OF multiplicity of SUITS then not!
The bill must stand if ALL upon the theory rreparabe
injury and the first prayer If complainant had not already
laid It's track defendants track but merely about to
do and had brought the bill prevent defend
ant the bill could not be sustained The that defendant
had been eacabe possession years would
be sufficient for requiring complainant first try alleged
rights at law Equity could not in such deprive defendant
III whole or in of It's possession by preventing resist
ing companan entering and taking possession whether e
cusvey or in common with defendant The right in such
should first be determined law, would be plain
adequate and complete remedy Moreover there
be presumption of irreparabe inury-rom the mere
fact that complainant could extend its The
long existing preserved There is no special
allegation from which ieparabe injury be inferred
The general allegation of ireparabe injury bill not
sufficient under the circumstances without special aega-
tions support it.
Is the different because complainant actually laid
its track? The right may still be tried general
allegation of reparabe injury still insufficient by itself
There still other allegations from which rrepaabe
jury be inferred If complainant had operating
railroad defendants track for considerable period espe
cy it had done with defendants acquescence the case
might be different Equity might preserve the
existing statusat least until the rights could determined
But here appears may be inferred defendant has long
been in mdurbed possession and complainant but
just laid its track and that against defendants
status to be preserved rather that which has long existed than
that which has been created and that by complainant
and under the circumstances of this 1t
that complainant has yet begun extension Of track
that it has any wharf other facilities shipping
freight the cannot CON
tnue shipping its freight in the which has