The Hawaiian gazette. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1865-1918, 1906-08-07
INJUNCTION
IS GRANTED

Judge Robinson yesterday granted q
temporary injunction TO August Hum
burg against John @. searle, as Sheriff
of the Island Of Hawaii, James Il. Full
lerton, II. B. Gehr and Kohala and
Hilo Railway Co. This was on the
amended bill to set aside sheriff % sale
and for injunction. After explaining
why the temporary injunction on the
original petition was dismissed the
court makes the following remarks:
sin the case at bar, the complain.
ant prays not only that the proceedings
in the action at law be stayed in order
to enable him to establish the misrep-
|resentation and fraud alleged but also
TO vacate and set aside the Sheriff Is
sale upon which the liability sought to
be enforced in the action at law was
predicated. The additional relief
sought in the case at bar is affirmative
in character and such that it could not
have been granted in the action at law,
even if the complainant here had prop.
erly pleaded and successfully main.
tanned his defense of Misrepresentation
and fraud on the law side of the court
and in my opinion, he is entitled to
maintain this suit if the averments and
allegations of mis- bill clearly or by
reasonable intendment show that he is
entitled to the relief for which he
prays here.
"While at the present time courts
of law as well as courts of equity have
concurrent jurisdiction in matters of
fraud, still from their inception courts
of equity alone assumed jurisdiction in
all cases involving questions of fraud
and it is only by gradual encroachment
and by occasional statutory enactment
that courts of law have acquired juris-
diction in such cases. The jurisdiction
of courts of equity originally embraced
all cases involving questions of fraud,
accident or confidence. In mary cases
of this sort courts of common law have
for lorg time exercised jurisdiction
and in many other cases, in which
initially no such remedy was allowed,
their Jurisdiction is now extended so as
to reach them. Black. Com, 431,
432.
''But if originally the jurisdiction
has properly attached in equity in any
case on the ground Of the supposed de-
feet of the remedy at law, that juris-
diction is not changed or obliterated
by the courts of law now entertaining
jurisdiction in such cases, when they
formerly rejected it. People VS.. Hough-
falling, Cal, 34s, 1852.
SIN order to justify court of
equity in declining to entertain juris-
diction on the ground that the party
ying to it for elief has a plain,
speedy and adequate remedy in the or
binary course of law, it must appear
that the remedy given at law is not
only plain, speedy and adequate one
but, also, rs complete as that obtaina-
BILE in equity. The remedy at law
must be plain; for if it be doubtful or
obscure at law, equity will assert a
jurisdiction. 1t must be adequate;
for, if at law it falls short of what the
party is entitled to, that POUNDS a
jurisdiction in equity. And it must be
complete; that is, it must attain the
full end and justice of the case. 1t
must reach the whole mischief, and Sc
cure the whole right of the party in a
perfect manner, at the present time
and in the future; otherwise, equity
will interfere and give such relief and
aid as the exigency of the particular
case may require. l Story, Eq. Jur.,
18th Ed, Sec. SO.
cit has always been cardinal rule
of equity not to entertain jurisdiction
where there is an adequate remedy at
law, and this principle is embodied in
many of the American statutes con-
ferring equity jurisdiction. But to ex-
clude the equitable jurisdiction, the
legal remedy, both in respect to the
final relief and the mode of obtaining
it, must be as efficient as the remedy
which equity would afford under the
same circumstances. And where equity
has original jurisdiction it will not be
ousted merely because jurisdiction has
been conferred by statute on courts of
law. So where equity alone can afford
the entire relief sought, the fact that
legal questions are also involved will
not GUST the court Of jurisdiction. And
in matters which are peculiarly of
equitable cognizance, such as fraud or
breach of trust, equity will retain jur-
isdiction, even though a court of law
may afford an adequate remedy.
Beach, Mod. Eq. Jur., Sec. 2.