Evening bulletin. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1895-1912, 1898-04-19
KALUA VERSUS HITCHCOCK
Decision Of the Maui Judge Causes q
Sensation.
In Spencer Divorce CaSe-SayS HaWali'S Legal
Head Acted Hastily and Did Not Consult
Authorities ReYereS Decision.

Hawaii are just now considerably
stirred up over the decision of
Judge Kalua, just out, at Kailua
iu the divorce matter of Christina
N. Spencer vs.. Frank M. Spencer.
Besides dealing a rap at Judge
Hitchcock, the end of which is
probably not yet, the decision
caused a rupture in and disso.
luton of Hllo law firm.
The case, which was a motion
by defendant, supported by aft
davit to rescind an order of Judge
Hitchcock for the payment of
$3.50 counsel fees and 500 per
month temporary aIimony came
up for hearing before Judge Ka-
lua on April 8. 1t appeared from
the record that order for payment
of counsel fees and alimony was
made simultaneously with the is
suauce of the summons on Feb
ruary "a, and summons and order
were served upon the defendant
at the same time. Of this matter
the court says:
The learned Judge who made
the order must have made it in
the hurry of business without
giving the mater any serious
thought and without having any
opportunity of consulting author
tiles. Such occurrences are liable
to happen to the best of men, and
a Judge should be the first man
to correct any mistake made by
him in that manner. L am now
asked TO pass upon this order in
the place of the Judge who has
been prevented by srrious illness
from attending at the term. 1t is
delicate matter, but | know that
| should deserve and obtain his
dis4pproval and censure should L
refuse on account of delicate SEN
timents to administer that justice
in this case which he would sure
ly do if he were personally pre-
sent and had the advantage of the
argument of counsel in the case
and the opportunity of investigat
ing the authorities that has been
afforded me-"
After citing several cases of re-
cord and authorities the Maui
Judge concludes:
From the above statement of
authorities it is perfectly plain
that the order in question was
made without any authority of
law. 1t has been a matter of
some doubt on my part as to what
relief the lihellee is entitled to,
but have come to the conclusion
that he should be put in the same
position as near as can be that be
WAS in before the order was made.
This Of course does not prevent
the libel ant from making ap-
plication to the court for the al
Iowance of a proper counsel fee
and reasonable temporary alimo-
ny which will undout t. dly be
allowed her upon proper show
ing.
81 therefore rescind the order
allowing $3.50 attorneys fee and
for the pay ment of 500 per month
temporary alimony to libellaut
heretofore made herein and order
the llbellant within ten days to
pay into court the sum of one
hundred dollars paid by libelee
to her counsel, and in case the
lib tllan's counsel have not yet
paid the said sum of 500 to libel
liant that they within the said ten
days pay the said sum of $40
into court; aud l further order
that the libellre's counsel, Mes.rs.
Hitchcock aud Wise, within ten
days from this date pay iuto court
the sum of 1851 paid by libellee to
them, aud the clerk of the Court is
hereby ordered to refund the
mouey 81 paid by libellaut and
her COUNSEL to the libellee upon
the fling by him of a receipt
therefor, without further order OF
the Court"