The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1901-01-09
OPINION OF THE COURT BY FREAR, CT.

OPINION OF THE COURT FREAR,
This action of aumpst for $267.93 here appeal
the Circuit judge whom went appeal from the
Court of South Ho under Act A of the Laws of
1898 Judgment given for the plaintiff in both the lower
By the provisions of said Act A only questions of law
may considered by this of this kind appeal
question of law raised the merits of the
whether the promise sued for the debt OF
another SO of frauds for it in
writing.
Was the defendants promise original collateras Was
credit given him another? 1t that the Volcano
Stables Company of which defendant manager had
tract to road made subconact for this pur
pose Hias and that he the defendant took HASH
plaintiffs and told its that HASH needed mate
witnesses testified that defendant said sub
stance HASH have the materials and will that you
paid for them" The entry plaintiffs books "Hiash
ink and ~ r. Wilson, in pencil. There evidence to
show that plaintiffs make entries in ink against
person goods delivered and in pencil against
those whom credit given the object being to
FUSION those whom credit given often kept several
There evidence also show that the plaintiff
presented any bill to HASH and looked to the defendant
alone The only witness for the defendant himself He
testified in effect that he made any promise all either
original collateral The Circuit Judge found that the de
PENDANT said substance: furnish whatever goods HASH
desire and will that pad and that the defendant
made himself primarily liable We hold matter of
In view of the foregoing need not express opinion upon
questions raised whether should have been
brought here exceptions rather than appeal whether
if properly appeal there should have been certificate of
points of law is whether the decision Castle Bow,
Haw. 366, should be held to govern the
The appeal dismissed and the case RENTED to the Circuit
Judge for such further proceedings may be proper.
Smith & Parsons for plaintiff.
G. Creighton and W. s. Wise for defendant.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE TERRITORY OF
HAWAII
SEPTEMBER TERM, 1900
MANUEL NUNEs CALACA y. ANTOINE MARKS
CALDETRA
EXCEPTION CIRCUIT CoURT, SECOND CIRCUIT
SUBMITTED OCTOBER 2, 1900 DECIDED DECEMBER ~ 1900
FREAR CD, GA1BRA1rH PERRY, u.
Ways Rights decide
accordance H grant a
others party desiring
way of necessity may be implied from
favor stranger merely of necessity
OPINION OF BY FREAR CT
This here exceptions the Circuit Court
to which 1t went appeal from the Commissioner Private
Ways and Water Rights for the District of Makawao
Maui There three lots through govern
ment road runs Lot is owned by the plaintiff Lot was
formerly owned by third person who sold the plaintiff
right OF to lot from the then located and
afterwards sold lot itself to the defendant who also
which he obtained from another person who
time the right of way lot granted The road has
now been changed to through lot about 100
feet distant from the point which way lot Joined
the old road This action brought secure continuation of
this way over lot to the present road
Apparently the Commissioner and the Circuit Judge each
thought that he to decide whether the plaintiff ought
have the right of way The Commissioner held that he ought
would be nconvenient get from his lot the
by another way The Circuit Judge held that he ought not
because could get by the other way and would make
the road dangerous he should be allowed get
by the proposed wayon account of the grading that
would required Counsel in this objected that the Cir
c dpe so decided his the locality and