The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1904-02-25
DON'T LIKE
TIE RULES
Bar Association
Wants Only
a Few.
The Professional Ethics
Should Not Be
Included.
Attorneys Want Some OF Judge
De Bolts Rules of Court
Attorneys Want Some of Judge
De Bolts Rules OF Court
Eliminated.

The Bar Association wants many
changes made in the rules of court
proposed by Judge De Bolt In fact
that organization placed itself on rec
ord yesterday as being opposed to
nearly all of the rules compiled by
Judge De Bolt and submitted to it
for consideration. The report of the
tion of many of the rules was adopted
almost unanimously and today there
will be discussion of the changes pro-
posed in the rules which have not been
entirely eliminated.
The following is the report submitted
by the committee at the meeting yes
terday afternoon:
To the Chairman of the Executive
Committee of he Bar Association.
Sir: The undersigned at your request
have examined the proposed Rules of
the Circuit Courts concerning which
they make the following suggestions:
The statutory authority for the
Rules, Sections 1149, 1926 1878, c. l.,
confines them to rules for regulating
the practice and conducting the BUSH
ness of the Circuit Courts in all mat
tiers not expressly provided by law
"notice to the opposing party of mat
tiers intended to be given in evidence"
and to those which shall be necessary
to prevent surprise and to afford an
opportunity for preparation for trial."
also rules for guidance of clerks in
making up calendars"
We recommend that rules be not
made which practically embody the re-
quirements of Statutes, or to suggest
forms of judgments, DEGREES and oaths
to witnesses, Jurors and Interpreters,
or of petitions in probate, or which re-
quire that all papers be endorsed, writ
ten and folded in a prescribed way;
and which prescribe the ordinary rou-
tine of a jury trial, or the proper rules
of professional etiquette to be observed
by members of the Bar.
The bonds required by Rules II and
Is are not required by the Statute, and
we think that the law would not au-
thorize them to be required by Rules.
We recommend that Rule 6 concern
ing bills of particulars be not adopted,
both because it conflicts with the me-
chanics' lien statute, and because while
a defendant if he likes can always get
it from the plaintiff, it is frequently
not desired, and the plaintiff in order
to prepare such particulars. especially
of claims of parties not within the
Circuit, may lose valuable time for en-
tering suit or garnishment.
We think that the Rules should not
specifically require that instructions be
presented to the jury in all cases i'm
mediately upon the close of the evil
dence.
The specifications of grounds of de-
murrer required by Rule z, and also
the requirement of the Rule that de-
murrers and all other matters in
case shall be heard by the judge before
whom the case is pending are not rec
commended by US. Section 1108 c. L.
makes the latter unnecessary, and the
former are sufficiently provided for by
the common law.
In accordance with the foregoing
general views, we suggest that the fol-
lowing rules be not recommended, viz:
Nos. 6, 16, 81, 3d. 33, "a, So, 81, SO, 40, AZ.
The draft herewith submitted will
show amendments suggested by us in
other rules.
ALFRED . EAf[1 w
w. L. STANLEY,
A C. NJ. ROBERTSON,
S. H. DERBY.
Honolulu. Feb. %, 1904
There was a long discussion over the /,
to cut out the rule |
the courts permission for an
attorney to withdraw or enter a case |
after suit had been instituted. Nc |
Giants Stewart wanted the rule left in /
and said that Magoon had taken |
ease from him without leave and he ,
had lost a $3.50 fee on that account. |
Mr.. Robertson said he didn't believe 1t |
q be any of the courts business what |
attorney a litigant had and Judge !
stanley didn't see what control the !
court had over the contracturaI rela-
ions that existed between attorney !
and client, Stewart said he didn't
believe the court should allow a change
# attorneys until the last attorney had !
been paid his fee, and Robertson re- /
,lied that the proposed rule wouldn't !
1elp Stewart collect his fee. Mr.. Me- /
~1anahan deemed it unwise for court !
@ lay down a rule of professional eth- /
cs and said no attorney would accept !
case until tn, relations between the !
,,ia,+ and former attorney had been i
dissolved. He was opposed to regu- !
ating the ethics of the profession IN
INV way by the court. The associa- =;
ion voted to eliminate the rule |
There was also discussion over the