The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1899-10-18
SUPREME COURT
Decides a Lahaina Case
Appealed.
Decree OF Circuit Court Is Affirmed
In Favor OF the Pioneer
Mill Company.

signed by Justices Frear and Whiting
has affirmed the decision OF the lower
court dismissing the bill on demurrer
in the case of Hama, Uni Kukailani.
her husband. and Lahaina Coffee and
Fruit Company. Limited. agains.
Pioneer Mill Company. Limited. an ap-
peal from the Circuit; Judge OF the First
Circuit.
The opinion OF the Court is written
by Justice Frear and is set forth in the
syllabus as follows:
III signed two deeds. one purporting
to release her dover right. the other
all her right, title and interest in GER
tain lands which had previously been
mortgaged by her husband (she not
joining or releasing her dower) and
sold on foreclosure. III afterwards was
informed that her grantee claimed that
there was a defect in the foreclosure
sale and that she had inherited
through her daughter all the estate OF
her husband. the daughter and huS-
band having died. and that consequent
ly fee simple title had been conveyed
by her deeds. She then brought a bill
for the cancellation of the deeds upon
the ground of false and fraudulent rep
reservations that she had only "A dow
er right. She did not show any de-
feet in the foreclosure sale or show
that she had more than a dover right
or that she executed the deeds in re-
lance upon any false representation
that she had only a dover right. She
alleged also that she did not know that
her deeds purported to- convey more
than a dover right. but she did not
allege that her grantee had misled her
as to what they purported to- convey or
show why she did not know what they
purported to convey.
Held, on demurrer. that the bill
was insufficient
The history of the case is given be-
low:
This is bill in equity for the can
| collation. of certain deeds on the ground
of fraud and Misrepresentation. The
case comes here on appeal from n de-
cree sustaining demurrer to- the bill
and dismissing the bill.
The bill alleges in substance: That
one kapakahi in 1887 mortgaged Ger
| tain land owned by him situated ut La
| haina, Maui. his wife. the plaintiff Ha-
ma, not joining or releasing her dow
er; that the mortgage was foreclosed
in 1889; that the purchaser at the fore
closure sale conveyed the lands in 1892
to another, who. in 1896. conveyed
| them to the plaintiff corporation
| which has since expended much money
| in improvements thereon; that Kappa
kahi died in 1887. leaving his said wife
and a daughter surviving him: that
| the daughter died in 1896: and that
| Hama and her present husband. the
| plaintiff Uni Eukailani. whom she
married in 1890. are lepeTs at the set
Element on Molokai: that on March 90.
1889. the defendant obtained from Ha-
ma two deeds. one purporting to- be
| a release of her dover. the other re-
lease and quitclaim OF all her interest
in these lands. and also a deed from
her husband giving his consent to- her
said deeds, and two days later brought
an action of ejectment against the
plaintiff corporation for these lands:
that at the time and before the said
deeds were executed Hama and her hus-
band were informed by an attorney OF
defendant that Hama was conveying
only a dover right by said deeds. and
that neither said Hama nor her hus-
band knew that she had any other
than n dover right in these lands. or
that either OF the deeds purported to
convey any other right; that the con-
sideration expressed in said deeds,
$500 in all, is grossly inadequate for
the interest of Hama and Uni kukai-
lani in said lands. and that these plain
tiffs on account of her detention at said
settlement were unable to travel and
mingle with people who are familiar
with the values OF property, and were
unable to form a just estimate of the
value of the title OF said Hama in said
lands. and were induced to- accept the
said sum through the wilfully false and
fraudulent representations of the de
PENDANTS agent that said Hama had nc
title or claim to said lands other than
right of dover. and the conCealmsnt
of the fact that said Hama Is heir oi
her said daughter and through hel
would inherit all estate left by Kappa
kahi. and the concealment OF the value
of the said Hana's interest in the sale
lands: that before signing said deeds
the said Hama consulted her attorney
in Honolulu by letter. and was advised
by him TO sign them. but that said ut
torney so advised without full kuowl
edge of the facts and upon misTepre
lsentations OF defendants attorney tina
4 the said Hama had no interest in sat'
lands other than dover interest
= that plaintiffs are informed and he
lieve that defendant claims that sal
foreclosure sale was void by reason q
certain alleged defects in the publica
ton of the notice OF intention to fore
close and of sale or otherwise. and tina
= at the date OF the said deeds the sal
Hama was entitled to said lands in fe
simple. and that by said deeds the It'll
TO said lands became vested in the de
PENDANT; that upon being so informe
the said Hama and Uni kukailani de
H. cIared said deeds to be void and there
upon. for the purpose OF protecting tn
piaintiff corporation and to obtain
more adequate consideration. execute
deed of all her interest in the sal
lands 10 the said plaintiff corporation
"The prayer is for the cancellation c
Itha daads from Hama and her huSban