The Hawaiian gazette. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1865-1918, 1904-12-30
BT1HUF NUT
CORPORATION
Supreme Court Makes
Ruling Of importance
10 Catholic Church.

In the Supreme Court yesterday
morning, Chief Justice Frear handed
down a decision, his colleagues con-
curing, in the case OF Bishop Libert
VS.. Malie Paahao, action in ejectment
for less than one acre of Kalihi land.
The appeal comes from the Circuit
Court which, after striking out much
of the plaintiffs evidence, ordered
non-suit, overruling exceptions. The
decision, in its essential points, fol-
lows:
When a plaintiff has rested, and
much evidence essential to his case
has been struck out or excluded. but
other essential evidence has not been
offered, a non-suit may be ordered and
the striking out or exclusion of the
essential evidence is harmless.
The Bishop of the Roman Catholic
Church in Hawaii is not sole corpor-
alton and cannot take by succession
from his predecessor in office. To sus-
tain ejectment, he must show a privity
of title or estate between himself and
his predecessor. If he claims under his
predecessor, whether he claims by pa
per title of adverse possession.
This is an action of election for So
100 of an acre of land situated at ka-
1ihi, oahu, covered by l.. c. A. 1O,49S,
r. p. 3546 to Nahinu, part of lot con-
tanning l 63-l00 acres, originally en-
closed by one stone wall and used, ac-
cording to plaintiffs claim, for forty
years or so as a site for a Catholic
church and a burying ground. The
b,,t ha oh r.
end Gulstan F. Ropert, Bishop of Pa
napolis. but beforeathe trial his death
was suggested and the present plain
tiff, his successor in office, was sub
stituted in his place.
1t does not appear that the Bishop OF
the Roman Catholic church in Hawaii
has ever been created a corporation or
even recognized as such by statute OF
judicial decision. Chapter 81 of the
laws of 1886. in which quitclaim OF
a piece of land that had been used by
the Catholic church since 1888, was
made and authorized to be made to
the predecessor of Bishop Gulstan
seems to have been framed on the
supposition that the bishop was not 9
corporation. Section 1 quitclaimed the
land to Hermann Kockemann, BishoT
of Olba and Vicar Apostolic of the Ha'
waiian Islands in trust fol
the Catholic Mission of the Hawaiian
Islands"
HALL WINS HIS CASE.
In the case of the Washington Mer.
camille Company Ltd, VS.. VIM. A
Hall, the Supreme court yesterday
morning gave a decision per curian
sustaining the exceptions of defendants
from the ruling of the First Circuit
| Court. In this case the District Magis
trate gave plaintiff judgment in hi:
| action of assumpsit on promissory
note. Defendant appealed, waving
+ Jury. and the case stood on the calen'
dar of Jam 1904 term, No. 1853. An order
: was made December, 1903 assigning
all odd-numbered civil cases to the
first judge. The order also said thai
all cases in which neither party an
severed ready would be peremptorily
Il continued for the term or dismissed
also that the calendar would be called
4 from time to time, counsel to be mott
Il fled of this through the press or other
wise BY an order of the court made
4 Dec. 81, 1908, all odd-numbered case'
of the jury waived calendar were call
81 ed at a. M, Jan. 4, 1904. As no coun
sci on either side appeared the appea
was dismissed. On jan s the defend
ant made a motion to reinstate the
case and vacate the order dismissinl
it on the ground that the Circuit cour
o. had not been opened at the time thu
order was made that the third judg'
who had been assigned presiding judg'
at the January term did not open tern
until 10 a. m. Jan. 4, the order having
II been made at a. m. before the tern
was legally open for business, that thu
absence of the defendants attorne.
was a mistake on his part, and tina
the order to dismiss was an abuse o
discretion.
The syllabus says as follows: Appar
emily both parties We're ignorant o
or Inexperienced the order made b!
the first judge Dec. 81 that the jur!
waived calendar would be called a
I'd 9 a. m. Jan. without deciding tn
validity of any term acts of the frs
judge done prior to 10 a. m. Jan. 4, a
which hour the term was formal,
opened, we think that this is case II
"A which it would be proper that the or
der of dismissal be rescinded and tn
cause remanded to the Circuit Cour
of the First Circuit for trial, or sucl
other proceedings as may be appro
pirate, and it is so ordered. The ex
ceptions are sustained.
YOU TAKE DESPERATE CHANCE!