The Hawaiian gazette., 1903-07-28

Iicate of admittance and license &c
practice, and from the time OF the
granting thereof by this Honorable
Court, has practiced law and con-
Quoted a general law business in the
Territory of Hawaii.
2.-That said Geo. A. Davis has been
guilty of professional improprieties,
malpractice, deceit and infidelity to his
client, and gross misconduct in the
manner following, - wit:
3.-That on or about the End day of
September, 1902, the said Geo. A.
Davis procured himself to be retain
ed as attorney for one Maria s. Davis,
and instigateu and advised her to
bring proceedings before a Judge of
the Circuit Court of the First Circuit,
at Chambers, against her brother, one
John K. Sumner, wherein and where
by she asked that said John X. Sum-
ner be declared non compos mentis
and placed under guardianship. That
thereafter and on or about the 18th
day of October, 1902, said John X.
Sumner and Maria S. Davis, parties
to said action, agreed to compromise
and discontinue said action, on the
payment by John X. Sumner to Maria
8. Davis of the sum of Ten thousand
100000 Dollars, and said Maria s.
Davis, through her son, one r. w.
Davis, notified said Geo. A. Davis her
attorney, of her intention to so set
tie and discontinue her said action.
That said Geo. A. Davis, though claim
ing to act as her attorney, refused to
settle and discontinue said action, un-
less he was paid the sum of Five
Thousand $4,000 Dollars. and threat
ened to prevent the settlement and
discontnuance of said action, unless
said sum Of money was paid to him,
and refused to take any steps to set
tie said action Until arrangements
were made whereby said Davis did re-
ceive the sum of Five Thousand (s5,-
000) Dollars as codnsel fees. And
Complainant charges that the said ac-
tions of Geo. A. Davis were grossly
improper, and that the said Geo. A.
Davis by so doing was guilty OF mall
practice and infidelity to his client.
4.-That the said John K. Sumner
was a man of upwards of the age of
eighty-four (S4 years, with little or
no knowledge of business, or the value
of money, and by reason of his great
age and lack of knowledge, was easi-
ly influenced and controlled, all of
which facts were we'll known to said
Geo. A. Davis.
5,-And complainant further alleges
that on or about the first day of De-
cember. 1902, the said Geo. A. Davis
made certain false representations to
one r. w. Davis and John K. Sumner,
to wit: that he, the said Geo. A. Da-
Wis, could Immediately obtain for said
John X. Sumner, the sum Of Forty
eight Thousand and Twenty-Five (s4s,-
o25) Dollars at that time deposited
Company, Of Honolulu, Territory of
Hawaii. on condition that the said
John X. Sumner would pay to him;
for said service in obtaining the
money. the sum of Three Thousand
(s3, OO0) Dollars, which representations
of said Geo. A. Davis were wholly
false and untrue and said Davis knew
them to be so, and made them for the
purpose of deceiving said John X.
Sumner and obtaining from him
promissory note for the amount of
Three Thousand (s3,0OO Dollars.
6.-That on or about the 1st day of
December, 1902, the said Geo A. Davis
persuaded and induced the said John
X. Sumner, by the means of the false
representations aforesaid, to sign
promissory note for the sum of Three
Thousand $4,000 Dollars in the words
and terms as follows:
"s3, 100000.
Honolulu, Dec. 1. 1902
"On demand, for value received,
promise to pay George A. Davis, or
order, the sum of Three Thousand (SS,-
OOO) Dollars at the Banking House of
Bishop & Company, without interest.
(Signed) JOHN *. SUMNER.
That at the time of receiving said
note said Davis had given no value
therefor, and said John X. Sumner,
had received no value therefor, but
misled by the misrepresentation Of
said Geo. A. Davis, believed that said
the said John X. Sumner,
note was necessary to insure the OBJ
tanning Immediately of the sum of
Forty eight Thousand and Twenty-Five
(S4S,025) Dollars oy the said Geo. A.
DAVIS from the aforesaid bank: and
that upon the failure of the sali Geo.
A. Laws to obtain the said sum, said
aore would have no valua or effect.
That said Geo. A. Davis, in violation
cf lis PROFESSIONAL oath, and duty as
an attorney and professional adviser.
thus falsely and frauduleAtly obtain
ed said note from the said John *.
Sumner and refused to return the
same, and kept the same and did not
obtain from the Bank the sum of For
ty-eight Thousand and Twenty-Five
(s4S, ,025) Dollars, as he had represent
ed himself able to do, and was thus
guilty of gross professional miscon-
duct, deceit and infidelity to his client.
THAT on or about the 29.h day
of October, 1902, Gulstan F. Ropert,
as Trustee for said John X. Sumner,
filed a petition addressed to the Pre-
siding Judge of the Circuit Court OF
the First Circuit, entitled "Gulstan f.
Ropert. as Trustee of John X. Sumner,
plaintiff, VS.. John X. Sumner, Victo-
ria Ellis Buffundeau, William s. Ellis,
John S. Ellis, Maria }. Davis, Wally
Davis, Right Rev, Gulstan F. Ropert,
Bishop Of Panopolis and S. Nj. Da-
mon and S. f. Damon, Co-partners,
doing business under the firm name
of Bishop & Company, Bankers, de-
fendants;" that said Geo. A. Davis