Evening bulletin. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1895-1912, 1901-10-15
HARRISON wins SUIT
AGAINST the MEMBERS
Of hAGEY CURE COMPANY
JurieS Drawn in Other Cases Supreme
Court Making Progress
Another Spendthrift
Case Inning.

T. NJ. Harrison was yesterday aft
ernoon awarded $4,000 with interest
at 6 per cent from March 10. 1898. to
date against j. A. Magoon and all the
rest of the members Of the Hagey Cure
Company.
After hearing evidence and argu-
nent on the question of whether the
defendants had knowledge that Juror
Vincent Fernandez had taken the
Hagey curc-the question of whether
Fernandez was disqualified from hav.
ing been subject of the cure had
previously taken up several days OIL
controversy--Judge Gear overruled
the motion to withdraw Fernandez
fem the jury. In the course OF his
opinion he stated that II was only in
extraordinary cases that such thing
could be done. and he did not believe
the facts In this case warranted such
action. He stated that there were two
liquor men on the jury, and they were
likely to be just AZ much prcjudiced
one way or the other as Fernandez.
The court stated further that he had
No doubt that the Supreme Court
would take great pleasure in overrul'
ing him II they had the slightest occa
sion. but he did not believe he was
wrong in this instance. and the iacts
would not justify the court in setting
aside a verdict which It had taken two
weeks to secure. The defendants ex
cepted to the ruling, and will In all
probability take an appeal to the Su'
preme Court.
During a lull In the Hagey cure case
n jury was drawn in the case OF A. w.
Maclean vs.. Nichigishi. This is suit
Tor $4,000 damages for injuries receiv
Cd by plaintiff from being run over by
IA horse driven by defendant. The jury
was secured only after general eX,
animation and Is as follows: Joseph
Mariner, Jas. X. Shaw. L. Buffan.
deau. H. n. Aimy. w. +. Hebron,
George X. Fox, George II. Roenitz.
Jas. A. Lawelawe, Frederick Angus.
+. c. Bertelmann. David X. Bent
and Manuel 4. Silva. The case was
t. have been taken up at noon yester.
day. but upon the representation of At
tCrney Davis that he would not have
time for lunch, the case was set for
today at 1890 and the attorney ad.
monished to spend the remaining time
in eating.
The first of the three Kapiolanl Els.
tate cases was taken up yesterday and
a jury sworn just before adjournment
1t Is composed az follows: w b.
Jones. Joe Andrade, Emil Hammer
James X. Pakele. Henry Y. Austin.
Abraham ID. Bolster. Henry Zerbe Ed.
ward Montgomery, Gus. II. Aea, A. J.
Smithies. James II. Black and Chas.
Atherton. This is the suit of eject.
ment against Peck 4 Co. and involves
&c title to valuable property at Ka-
kaako.
F. NJ. Hatch was called as an asso-
ciate justice to sit with the Supreme
Court yesterday, by agreement be-
tween the attorneys In the case Of
Gulstan +. Ropert, trustee. VS.. John
X. Sumner. This Is an appeal from
Judge Little. who sustained motion
for non-suit brought by the defend
ants. The plaintiffs appealed. Argu-
ments were made yesterday by T.
McCants Stewart and s. NJ. Ballou.
In the morning the Supreme court
heard the concluding arguments in the
Kamalo case.
In the case OF Q. II. Berrey VS.. Geo
w. Harrison, Judge Gear rendered a
decision for defendant. This was a
suit upon note. which Harrison claim.
ed to have paid.
Motion for default has been made in
the case of II. Hackfeld 4 Co. VS.. K.
Ito.
An amended complaint has been al.
ed In the case of Enoka Poaha VS.. Il.
Lililehua. This is suit for $2O0U
damages for false arrest.
An answer making a general denial
has been filed in the case OF Lewis
4 Co. vs.. Ben Guerrero.
Judge Little held a brief session of
court yesterday morning, to hear argu.
ments to have Magoon's appeal In the
spendthrift case Of Kalua Kapukini
stricken from the files. II was con.
tended that he had no authority TO ap.
peal, as he had been repudiated by his
EDWARD, and that he could not appeal
in two cases by the filing of one bond.
Judge Little held, however that once
an appeal was perfected jurisdiction
was taken out of his hands, and 1t was
now a question for the consideration
of the Supreme Court