The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1905-05-26
KENTWELL
RESPONDENT
His Brother-in.LaW c..
II. Holt Complains
Against Him.

George H. Holt has brought a bill
foc accounting against Lawrence K.
Kentwell. Petitioner sets forth that he
lis a ranchman, who has devoted the
greater portion of his life to pastoral
pursuits and who has little knowl-
edge of any other business than the
raising of cattle, While respondent is a
resident of Honolulu, and is keen and
sharp business man and is especially
conversant and familiar with the real
estate business in Honolulu. He goes
on to say that, relying upon the integ
rity and honesty of respondent, about
September 1, 1898. he entrusted to re-
spondent the care and management of
his business interests and the control
of his property in Honolulu.
The Honolulu property consists chief
ly of an undivided one-half interest in
d valuable piece of land at the corner
of Maunalzea and Pauahi streets, the
other half being owned by Annie Holt
Kentwell, wife of respondent and sister
of petitioner. Then he tells how Kent
we'll at the time he took charge of his
property. also secured control of that of
petitioners sister Kananimauloa,
their aged aunt, had decided them the
land, the consideration being love and
affection and the payment of an an
nuity to the grantor. Annie Holt was
as yet unmarried. Kananimauloa died
June IA, 1900.
When Kentweu took charge of it, the
property was subject to a lease made
to Lee Wal for Is years from Sept. l.
1894. Lee Wal had made valuable i'm
provements upon the leasehold, which
'by various conveyances was trans
ferred to Caterina A. Wright and she
sold it, at the first of June, 1900, to
KentweH acting as agent for Kanani-
mauloa, Annie Holt and petitioner, and
here comes the first charge made
against Kentwell to wit:
That since said date respondent has
assumed and claimed to own said
leasehold in his own right and has re-
ceived and converted to his own use
the results and profits of said lease
hold
Subsequent demands by petitioner
for an accounting of the rents or
profits were denied by respondent, who
maintained that he was entitled to
keep them as owner of the leasehold.
Petitioner, on information and belief,
alleges that respondent bought the
leasehold with money belonging to his
cestuis que trustent.
Next petitioner alleges that respon-
dent made a bill of sale to Ching Kok
purporting to convey to him an in
terest in the premises for a considera-
ton of $1,000, and that although de-
mand has been made on respondent he
has not accounted for petitioners in
terest in said sum. Holt says he did
not know until recently of this transfer
to Ching Kok, and does not know but
that respondent may have transferred
to others further interests in the prop
erty. Therefore a discovery in this re-
gard is necessary.
Petitioner further alleges that on or
about July q, 1904, he and his sister,
Annie Holt Kentwell executed a mort
gage to w O. Smith for $4,000 on the
premises in question, that this sum was
on that date paid by petitioner to re-
spondent and that the latter has had
theInoney in his possession and control
since then, excepting such sums as he
may have paid out for the account of
petitioner. He goes on to say he has
made numerous demands and requests
of respondent for an accounting of the
mortgage money, and that respondent
did render an account on January 1,
1905 "'but that said account was full of
mistakes, inaccuracies and false and
improper charges.
The prayers of the petition are for
discovery and accounting with respect
to all the matters stated. Thayer &
Hemenway are attorneys for petit
toner.