The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1903-08-26
JAPANESE
AS TRADERS
Estate of Store.
keeper Turns
Out Well.
Client vs.. Lawyer Suit
From Hilo Pending
on Demurrer.
Bishop Estate Lease at Kakaako
the Basis Of Equity Case.
The Ensuing Term.

The Ensuing Term.
The first term Of the Circuit Court Of
the First Judicial Circuit under the
new law will be opened for business on
Tuesday, September 8. the Monday
next previous to that date being
Labor Day. a public holiday. Grand
jurors will come before Judge Gear
on the opening day and trial jurors
before Judge De Bolt. Gear and Ro-
binson according to their respective
summons.
JAPANESE TRADING THRIFT.
A somewhat valuable estate Of a dead
japanese merchant has just been ad-
rninistered. the final account being filed
in court 1t is that OF Iwakichi Kato
and the administrators are Kihu Ka-
to and Yaichi Mitsuda. The receipts
are s16.22O47 and payments s11,0736S.
leaving a balance of s5146s4. OF the
receipts ss426.02 was the net amount of
fire claim award after the expenses
thereon of s1O47.O3 had been paid. The
store has been carried on and fits stock
in trade increased. and though there
is Indebtedness of $1,000 for new goods
there are accounts due of $4,000 1t is
remarked in the statement that the
widow as sole legatee is responsible for
the new obligations. The whole exhi-
bit is an instance of japanese thrift in
trade.
ATTORNEY AND CLIENT.
Holmes & Stanley have filed a brief
for defendant on demurrer In the case
of Antonio Joaquin da Estrella vs.
Charles NJ. lie Blond. 1t is an action
possessing much general interest, be-
ing one brought against an attorney
at law for negligence in failing to per-
feet an appeal from the Judgment of
the District Court Of South Hilo, Ha-
wall. rendered against de EstrelIa
The case is before the Circuit Court
of the First Circuit upon a demurrer
to the jurisdiction, on the ground that
the wrong alleged occurred within the
limits of the Fourth Judicial Circuit.
Under Act Sc of the laws of 1898. in
force when the action was begun, &C
tons for tort are triable only in the
Circuit in which the alleged cause OF
action arises.
AS counsel for plaintiff at the hear |
ing admitted that the court had no |
Jurisdiction over the action II it was |
1ne OF tort, the whole force of the ar
sument for the defendant in this brief |
s directed at showing that it is an
lction of tort. Comparisons are set up
Is follows and a number of cases are
,ited in support OF the contention that
he neglect of a clients interest by his
attorney is n case of wrong. whether
/ contract does or does not exist:
Suppose in the absence OF express
contract an injury results to the guest
If an innkeeper through the latter's
omission to keep the hall lighted. can
anyone say that the innkeeper is not
liable to an action IN tort? Or that
he presence of an express contract
would take away the liability in tort?
And the same = true where an in
ury results to a passenger through the
negligence and omission of common
arrier. TIE fact that the Relationship
If innkeepor and guest or of carrier
md passenger arises from contra ct
'annot purge the misfeasance or non
easance of lis character of tort. Ard
10 in the case of attorney and eli ent
he contract gives rise to the relation
hip, but that once established the neg
igent action or omission 20 act, al- |
hough breach OF contract, is also u !
ort and the basis OF an :tion ex I
elicto."
It is commended that ncwher> in the
III Of complaint Is there an allaga ion
f breach of contract, and it is ASKED ]
- III PiehAAiAiA iirS ST ih6Sh SdeSs
pom carelessness and negligence If /
his is intended as an action for bre all i
f contract. WoLi1 not IN allegation c
f the failure to appeal have been suffi- i,
lent
KAKAAKO LEASFHCLD.
Argument on demurrer was heard in $
he equity case of baIa and others vs.. c
loses Keliihuluhuiu ard others, hill to c
ANGEL lease, by Judge De Bolt yes:er-
ay morninE. III fact there Wore sew a