Evening bulletin. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1895-1912, 1903-08-01
ATTORNEY DAVIS PRESENTS F0RCEFUL
BRIEF IN SUMNER CASE PROCEEDINGS

in good faith after examining the rec
ord in both cases in which | was en-
gagged and which the present informa.
ton is based on the 26th OF June, 1903,
the informant, Lorrin Andrews, Attor.
ney General, in mis- report to the Su.
preme Court finds and says as follows:
"In regard to the case of
Geo. A. Davis, while criticism
might be INDUCED in as to his
methods and the amount of
fee charged by him to Maria
s. Davis for his services, yet
these are matters between
the attorney and client upon
which no charges could be
based in the absence of objec.
| ton by the client"
Maria s. Davis did not even appear
in the Supreme Court at any time dur.
ing the investigation and hearing Of
this matter, filed no charges and made
no objection to the payment Of the
sum of five thousand dollars to me
and J. A. Magoon and the Deputy of
the Attorney General, +. c. Peters,
and the receipt for the s2,5OO.0O in the
handwriting of the said f. c. Peters,
and is in evidence in this matter, and
the respondent prays It may be consid.
cred part of this brief. Maria s.
Davis was duly subpoenaed by me this
respondent as a witness, but failed to
appear.
The reason for filing the information
after the report of the Attorney Gen.
eral above cited does not appear.
| 3
| The evidence entirely fails to sus.
tain the allegations Of the information
of the Attorney General in the case of
Maria S. Davis admitted that he had
failed to prove that the respondent
had procured himself to be retained as
her counsel.
The evidence adduced by the in.
formant wholly fails to establish any
Of the charges in the information of
unprofessional conduct, fraud, deceit,
Misrepresentation and infidelity to my
client, Maria s. Davis, as charged.
This Court has already held in the
case of Gulstant +. Ropert, trustee VS..
John X. Sumner, ct al, that the deed
of trust made by Sumner to the Bish.
op of Panopolis, under the circum
stances. was revocable on account of
the age, infirmity and weakness of
mind of the settler and the fact that
he did not have independent advice
when he made and executed; the deci.
sion on this point is hereby referred
t. and made part of this brief The
Institution of the suit of Maria s. Da.
Wis, as next friend OF John X. Sumner,
VS.. The Oahu Railway and Land Co..
to restrain the trust deed which was
held to be revocable, was therefore
justifable, and the suit against the
railroad was settled by ard with the
fun consent of Maria S. Davis, who re.
ceived the sum of ten thousand dollars
out of the proceeds of that settlement
by and with the consent and approval
OF Sumner; they both signed the deed
after the settlement of the suit, and
are estopped from denying that the
settlement was agreed to by them.
Maria s. Davis could not deny II, for
she was not witness. The old man
In the case, the brother of my client
had given an option to the Oahu Rail.
way and Land Company to sell this
same land to the corporation for one
hundred thousand dollars. One hun
dred and ten thousand dollars was OBJ
tained by me as her counsel for the
same land-ten thousand dollars In ex
cess OF option, one-half OF which
charged as fee and, by direction OF
my client, paid $4,000 to Magoon and
Peters with the full knowledge and
consent of my client. She is not call
ed to deny this. She signed the deed
so did Sumner. The fee was reason
able. The suit was brought and in
junction obtained and served; the case
was heard upon a motion to dismiss
and 1t was and is commended, erroneous
ly dismissed. An appeal to this Cour
was taken and pending when this set
Element was made. The evidence o
Il. w. Davis on the part of the inform
ant established that John X. Sumne
was about to dispose of his most val
liable property and divide the none!
between the Roman Catholic Church