The Hawaiian gazette., 1907-12-13
THE AMENDED
COMPLAINT FILED

. Judge Robinson yesterday fled &
: written opinion of considerable length
. granting the motion of the plaintiff ir
| the suit of William j. Lowrie v. h. P
baldwin and others, to file an amend.
ed complaint.
The amended complaint was filed al
most Immediately. Besides making
some changes in the method Of stating
the plaintiffs cause Of action, 1t makes
} considerable difference in the parties
defendant. The defendants In the
amended complaint are H P. Baldwin.
J. B. Castle, William r. Castle, George
P. Castle. the S. N. Castle Estate. Ltd,
Joseph P. Cooke, and W. NJ. Alexander.
The sisters of James B., william R
and George p. Castle, who were made
parties in the original complaint, are
omitted in this, and the S. N. Castle
Estate is made a party instead. The
amended complaint contains three
counts. IN the first and second it is
alleged that contract was made with
Lowrie by the defendants, In order to
obtain his services, whereby in consid-
Grafton Of his refusing fattering Of
fer from the Waialua Agricultural
company he was promised the option
of 5000 shares of Hawaiian Commercial
stock at the price the Syndicate got it
at, and all the time he needed in which
to dispose of other stock to pay for
it. and in addition the managership of
Hawaiian Commercial for five years;
l To- he or xx-o q
broken by his being discharged as
manager, and being thereby rendered
unable to pay for his 5000 shares. He
was obliged to sell and thereby was
done out of the opportunity to make
s400. 900. The third count sets up the
same contract, but instead of alleging
a mere breach of the contract by the
defendants and thereby the loss of the
opportunity to make 100000 it is al
legged that in order to themselves make
the profit and to give Baldwin the
position of manager of the plantation,
they dismissed him from his position
as manager.
The amended complaint was immedi-
ately given to High Sheriff Henry for
service.
A motion was at once made on be-
half of the defendant, H. P. Baldwin,
for a bill of exceptions to the decision
and order to take before the Supreme
Court the decision of Judge Robinson
on the ground that it will tend to the
speedy determination of litigation
In his opinion, the preparation OF
which had involved the looking up of |
more than 500 citations Of authority, |
Judge Robinson sums up the objec-
tions urged to the motion as follows:
/. That the court must pass on the
good faith of the plaintiffs proposed
amendments;
3. That the court in passing on said
question of good faith should consider
the facts set forth in the affidavits;
8. That the uncertainty, evasiveness
and ambiguity in the proposed amend
ed complaint, particularly in the addi-
ton of the contract allegations in the
third count. and in the insertion OF the
word certain" in the last paragraph
of the first and second counts OF said
amended complaint;
4. That the allegations contained In
the several counts or causes of action
set out in the proposed amended COM
piaint whereby the contract sued upon
is attempted to be set out are neon
sistent with the asserted memoranda
thereof, comprising a number of let
ters. copies of which are attached to
and made a part Of said proposed
amended complaint, in their chron-
illogical order, marked alphabetically,
as exhibits;
:. That the contract sued upon Is
indefinite in terms and might be broken
at any time without liability for more
than nominal damages;
g.. That the damages claimed are
too remote, speculative and uncertain
to sustain a cause of action;
7 That there is a misjoinder Of
counts or causes of action in said pro-
posed amended complaint, and
8. That the contract sued upon is
void as against public policy. Il
The first three, he says, are not OF
sufficient Importance to need extended
AS to the fourth objection, Judge
Robinson says, it is not alleged OF
claimed in the proposed amended COM
plaint that the copies of the letters
to said proposed amended
complaint, and therein referred to as
exhibits, either .singly or as whole,
constitute the contract sued upon. On
the contrary the proposed amended
complaint distinctly alleges that the
exhibits constitute merely memoranda
of the Contract in suit, and careful
examination of the exhibits fails to
disclose any inconsistency between
them and the contract alleged.
AS to the objection that the contract
is for an indefinite term and so might
be broken at any time without iabii-
ity for more than nominal damages, 1t
NAV be said that the failure to state
a specific term or time for the per-
Torrance or completion of contract
does not necessarily render the term
of the contract or the time for its
or completion indefinite
or uncertain or make the contract de-
at will. THAT is certain
which can be made certain and in
order to arrive at the true intent OF
the parties in making and entering
into the contract, as to the time for
its commencement. performance ana
the relations of the parties
and all of the surrounding facts and
may be shown. in order
that any one or all of these matters
may be determined by the jury as
matters of fact1 Courts in the con-
struction of contracts look to the