The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1901-05-18

to which change, defendant believes
plaintiff consented; that by reason of said
change That portion of Beretania street
referred 10 was rendered inaccessible and
it became impossible for defendant to
reach what is now the new line of Bere-
tania street by traversing what plaintiff
alleges to be Beretania street; that the
building Of defendant does not interfere
with the right of the plaintiff in the
premises. in as much as before the build
ing was erected plaintiff could not have
access to Beretania street as formerly
that the said building does not in any
way interfere with plaintiff or interfere
with his rights and that before the be-
ginning of the present suit the defend
ant had nearly completed SAID building,
and TO cause him to remove it would
cause him great and irreparable dam
age.
The other allegations of plaintiffs hill
are neither denied nor admitted, but left
to the proof of the plaintiff
DEEDS NULL AND VOID.
In the case of Kailikea Qnsane), by
Samuel Keka, VS.. John Hapa and KAPPA
Ii, which was an action to cancel certain
deeds, the First Judge of the First Cir
cult Court yesterday issued a decree
awarding judgment in favor of the plain
tiff
By this decree two deeds are cancelled,
the one conveying from the Plaintiff to
the defendant John Hapa a certain piece
of land at Moanalua, known as "Awawa-
loa,'' and the other conveying from the
said John Hapa to- the defendant Kapali
the same piece of land. These deeds be-
ing null and void, the title to the1and
in question is again vested in the said
plaintiff Kailikea.
The Court finds as follows: First,
that John Hapa, defendant above nam
ed, residing at Moanalua, Island of Ca
hu. on or about the 31st day of March,
1894 by fraudulent pretenses and deceit
did prevail upon the above named Kali
kea and cause her to deliver to him the
deed of conveyance to a certain piece of
land known as "Awawaloa'' situate at
said Moanalua
Second, that at the time of the exc
cution of said deed by said Kailikea con-
veying said piece of land to said Hapa,
said Kailikea was an idiot and said Ha-
pa we'll knew that she was an idiot, and
that the sum of money paid by said
Hapa was so grossly inadequate to the
true value of said land as to raise the
prescription of fraud, which has not been
rebutted.
Third, that said Hapa thereafter by
deco transferred ana dSSlS neQ SdIQ piece
of land to Kapali, defendant above nam
ed.
Fourth, that at the time of the exc
cutfon and delivery of said deed by Ha-
pa to Kapali. conveying said piece OF
land. said Kapali well knew that the
said Hapa obtained from said Kailikea
the deed first aforesaid by fraudulent
pretenses and deceit, and that, at the
time said deed was so obtained from
said Kailikea by said Hapa, said Kapali
knew that said Kailikea was an idiot.
The land in question is awarded to
Samuel Keka as next friend of said Kai-
Ikea, for the use and benefit of said
Kailikea. The costs are taxed to the
defendants.
j. NJ. Davidson, Esq, was counsel for
plaintiff and T. McCants Stewart for the
defendants.
MIST VS.. KAPIOLANI ESTATE.
The Kapiolani Estate has filed its bond
of II. NJ Mist VS.. Kapiolani Estate, E.
c. Macfarlane being surety.
CUMMINGS ESTATE.
Cecil Brown, the administrator of the
estate of w. II. Cummings, deceased
has been ordered by the Court to pay to
F. w. Wundenberg. guardian of the
ptISOHS anu VI the minor chill
dren of the deceased, the sum of 81, 500
from any monies of the said estate now
in his possession, it being shown by the
petition of said guardian that the widow
and children of the deceased are in des-
titute circumstances.
FEDERAL COURT
The case of Hind VS.. Consuelo con-
tinued from Thursday, was yesterday ar
gued before Judge Estee, Paul Neumann
presenting the case for the plaintiff and
Robertson & Wilder for the defendant.
The case was taken under advisement
by the Court.
There was an attempt on the part of
Ballou & McClanahan and II. A.
Bigelow. attorneys for the defendants, in
the case of the United States VS.. Sober
gren and Stuart, to have the bill of ex-
ceptions in the case settled, but the Court
ruled that all matters connected with the
case must be postponed until June 5.
the date set for the hearing on the dis
puted records.
EXECUTIVE COUNCIL.
\ meeting of the Acting Executive and
the heads of Departments was held yes
terday morning and unfinished business
considered. The proceedings were not
given out.