The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1906-08-17

Conflict of Jurisdiction
Under Attachment
Statute.


in four different suits against the pro-
prietor for debt. In serving the at
tachments there has been a conflict of
jurisdiction between the high sheriff
and the county sheriff Perhaps it may
also prove, if there be money to make
test, that there has been a conflict
between the county sheriff and the
statute of attachments
So far as priority of attachment goes,
though, the county sheriff has the adj
vantage. Yet this may not matter, for
it is said that there are goods in the
store of value greater than the COM
bined attachment debt
In the meantime Iwata himself is
supposed to have skipped to the MAIN
land and taken between $4,000 and $4,000
cash with him. There We're IS in the
safe and 81 in the cash register when
the first creditor to pounce upon the
assets effected an entry. Iwata's ac-
count in local bank is bust how
ever, as check thereon has been dis
honored
Iwata used to run the Kibi Shoten
on Hotel street near the river. Lass
February he opened a candy store,
with bakery and restaurant, in the
premises formerly occupied by s. Oza-
XII. Lately E. NJ Watson on behalf
of H. May & Co., brought a suit
against him for goods sold and oe-
livered. An attachment before judg-
ment was issued.
An hour after this attachment was
served on Iwata the same policeman
as did the first-Charlie Ciark-served
two other<attachmeuts on him in suits
brought by S. Ozaki for whom Thayer
& Hemenway are the attorneys, on ac
count respectively of rent and fix
lures
Clark is an officer under County
Sheriff Brown and, Having served the
three attachments as stated, he lock-
ed up the establishment and turned
the keys over to Brown. The cases
came to trial last Monday, when judg-
ments amounting to a little over $500
against Iwata were rendered
Next came the clash of jurisdictions.
Wednesday morning another attach
ment was brought against Iwata on
behalf of Sugamoto the defendants
cook, for wages amounting to S170- j.
d. Avery, district court practitioner
anu d C1SEh III Il Il AAiSSAi AoN VI
flee. is the attorney in this case.
When Avery drew up the papers he
found that the new attachment law,
passed in 1905 and approved ten days
after the County Act, says that the
sheriff shall make attachments and
that for the purposes of the act the
term sheriff shall mean the high
sheriff or his deputy and, in cases of
attachment from the, district court,
ANY police officer 1t does not APP
pear. on the face of the statute, as
if the county sheriff has anything to
do with it.
Therefore Avery concluded that it
was safer to have the high sheriff
serve Sugamoto's attachment. When
High Sheriff Henry proceeded to do so
he found the place locked UP, with the
keys in the hands of the county, sheriff.
He saw County Sheriff Brown about
the matter, who readily handed over
the keys to him to enable him to serve
the process.
Forthwith, however, Brown would
appear to have repented of his mag
nanimity, for he straightway sent Off
Ger Van Giesen to Iwata's place to de-
mand the keys back from Henry. The
high sheriff told Van that when he
had taken an inventory he would sur
render possession OF the premises to |
the county sheriff. Van Giesen duly |
reported this message to his chief, who |
dispatched two policemen
to the scene with orders to put the |
high sheriff out and use force if neceS-
sary.
When the brace of Browns officers
arrived Henry had departed, but Dep
uty High Sheriff Sea was found taking
the inventory. Sea was as game as
his chief, declining to leave until his
duty was completed. He finished the
inventory and then left the store in
charge of the two county policemen.
Now a guard of two officers is main
aimed on the premises, precaution
hat the county sheriff did not take in!
he first instance. So the matter stands.
Whether it's outcome will be a settle
nent of the intent of the law of at
achments, relative to sheriffs, remains
o be seen