The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1902-12-18
MONEY PAID
INTO COURT
Judge De Bolt Will
Deal With
Sumner.
LAWYERS FIGHT
FOR The $4,000
Warm Exchange OF Compliments
Between Opposing
Counsel.

With the deposit in the First Circuit
court of certificate of deposit for the
sum of $48,02 yesterday afternoon the
troubles OF John K. Sumner were shift
ed from Bishop & Co. to Judge ]. T. De
Bolt. The money is to remain subject
TO the order of the court and is likely
to be tied up for some months if an
appeal is taken to the Supreme Court,
as has been threatened.
The case of Bishop Gulstan VS.. John
K. Sumner ct al was called up the first
thing in the morning, and there was
an imposing array of counsel present
on behalf of the various defendants,
who are much more interested in the
disposition of the old mans money than
either the plaintiff or Sumner. Hum
phreys, Thompson & Watson appeared
for the Ellis children, while Davis said
c. Peters appeared for Maria Davis and
WalIy Davis.
Though considerable time was spent
in discussing the case the only thing
actually done yesterday was an order
withdrawing the $4,000 from Bishop &
Co.'S bank and postponing the hearing
to a future day. This morning argu-
ment will be had upon a motion made
by e. C. Peters for the striking out of
the paragraphs in Humphreys answer
referring to Magoon as impertinent and
the main issues should not be presented
until after this preliminary motion was
disposed of.
Upon the opening of court Humphreys
submitted motion on behalf of the
Ellis heirs asking that the $4,000 be or
dered paid into court. Amongst other
allegations it was stated:
Because, A. It appears from the an
swer of the said John K. Sumner, and
the defendant Maria S. Davis, that the
title of said John K. Sumner to said
moneys is, in the most favorable aspect
of the case, vague, uncertain, doubtfui,
nebulous, misty, hazy, and perplexing.
Because 5. 1t appears from all or
the pleadings herein and the exhibits
thereto attached that the title to said
moneys is in question, disputed and liti-
gated, and that the claim, right and
title asserted to the same by the parties
to this proceeding grows out of and is
based upon and under said deed OF
trust.
Because, 6. Tt appears from the an
swer of these defendants that the pos
session of said moneys was obtained
| from the complainant herein by said
John K. Sumner, by the deceit, misrep-
resentation, trickery, and GOWN of his
! attorney, done, performed and said in
the presence of him the said Sumner
Because, z. 1t appears from the bill
| of complaint herein and the answer of
| these defendants that the attorney for
the said John K sumner did in the
presence of him the said John K. sum
ner, cancel and Spoilate the document
| in said trust deed mentioned, referred
| TO and specified, to wit, the last will
and testament of said John K. Sumner.
made and executed on the 18th day of
| September, A. D., 1898.
Because, s. 1t sufficiently appears
from all of the pleadings herein that
said Sumner, said Maria S. Davis and
! their attorney are in league to conceal,
cover and spirit away said moneys, in
contravention of the right and equity
| of these defendants and to their mani
fest wrong, injury and damage.
This motion is based upon all and
every the pleadings, exhibits and filss
| in this cause.
VICTORIA s. BUFFANDEAU,
'WM. S. ELLIS,
'tJNO. S. ELLIS"
The fun began during the reading of
the answers filed to the petition of the
Bishop. Separate answers had been
hled by the three EllisI children, by
Maria S. Davis and by John K. Sumner
which were widely at variance. Hum
phreys began the reading of the Ellis
answer first, to which Davis objected
claiming that Sumner should have
precedence. The matter was amicably
settled. however, and Attorney Peters
read the answer of Sumner, after Davis
had the name of Peters entered as as
sociate counsel.
Humphreys then read the disputed
answer in which the tscandaIous" ref
erence to Magoon appeared, referring