The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1899-05-10


The respondents charged themselves received by
them offset by payments made the plaintiffs, that the final
balance the credit of the respondents found be $449SS
The circuit judge ordered Judgment for this in favor
of respondents against plaintiffs Jointly and severay be
divided equally From this the plaintiffs appealed Their
sci contended that the circuit judge sitting in equity had
authority jurisdiction make decree ordering the plaintiffs
pay the of $449SS accounting prayed for in
the BILL that the suit instituted for partition alone and
hedecree contrary the rules practice and procedure in
equity.
are opinion of partition has jus-
diction consider and adjust claims and equities between
In II Am Eng Ency Law P. 753, the following
is of the law this point: IF coenant has
made advances in of his share of the purchase price,
has paid than his just share of encmrance
may be directed and if made the share upon which such
balance equitable lien may be sold satisfy it, Unfort
naey of the cited justify the above text in
accessible But the doctrine clear that whoever by suit
for partition vokes the jurisdiction of of equity in his
behalf thereby submits himself to the jurisdiction and
comedies its authority compel him to deal equtab with his
Freeman Partition, Sec. 3O5
The equities of the respective parties growing of their
ownership common, considered and disposed of
upon the broad principles which of equity in the
administration of justice. Story Eq. Jur. Sec. CSC
held in Titspor a. Stout 40 ILL., rs that where
one tenant in common removes
the other contribute the of
their respective interests and such contribution
of equity will enforce upon such interests equitable
the which has been removed by the
redeemng tenant This does the question of
rof of cotenant when other than encumbrances as mort
gage have been removed by him from the estate. y
who has paid than his share of the purchase price
of the may be indemnfed Damages for waste
said hee is hardly question in relation property which
this court determine incidentally for the purpose of
doing complete Justice and preventing multiplicity of suits
EacTer Fa1r0c Hills Oh. Ill cited in Freeman, Parti
ton Sec 52 sMoney laid r improvements of the
estate involving equitable compenatons within the
power the consider and compel contribution thereof
Story F Jur See And the learned author says gener
ally In equity for partition various other equitable
rights claims and ad stments will be made which be
vond the of of law i'd Sec 656b, 18th Ed See
Campbell q. Campbell, II n. J. Eq 26S
The expenditures of respondents for which the circuit Judge
ordered contribution % for Taxes unavoidable
and NAV be against the land Plaintiffs should pay
their share of ncumbrance 90 Money paid towards
purchase of "Paaawaha' 'Lehukini'' and 'Mahauepu"
These became the estate and the plaintiffs by
all authorities should pay their share OF the expended
therefor 60 For money expended by defendants
in bringing (and defending lawsuits III behalf OF their COM
mon property These claims would be eognzaoe at law but on
the PRINCIPLES laid by Story and by the of Becker
FarOac Judge sitting IN partition III equity had
authority award compensation We are IN ignorance OF the
details of this litigation whether or not whether
cessfu only the general principle OF awarding comP
tion at all contested by plaintiffs and no details We're OBJ
ected to- 1t that the circuit Judge has hed that the
exnendites of the litigation behalf OF the common
and nothing been shown to the contrary and no
objections are made the The circuit Judge ordered