The Hawaiian gazette. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1865-1918, 1917-01-02
One Time Honolulu Lawyer Claims
He was Read Out OF Law
Partnership
RECEIVED NO PAYMENT
FOR GOOD WILL, HE SAYS
Court Asked To Determine His
Equity Rights and % Him
Justice lh

William A. Kinney, former Honolulu
lawyer, yesterday filed in the Office Of
the local circuit court a snit for ae-
counting against his former law part
ners, Mason r. Prosser, Robbins B, An
derson and Benjamin l.. Marx.
The suit, which was filed at two
o'clock, asks that an, account may be
taken Of all the late partnership deal
ings and tfansactions until its termina-
ton; that the defendants may be d.
tected to pay to Mr.. Kinney what shall
appear 10 be due him, including fair
value Of his interest in theSgood will
Of the business, and that the court
grant whatever relief it may deem
proper in the matter &
TIE papers were fled by Judge vii.
liam b. lymer, who, at the request of
Mr. Kinney, who is absent from the
Territory and has been residing in
Nova Scotia, Canada, FOR some years
past, visiting here when business oeca.
sion has arisen, has been asked to rep
resent him In this suit. II Is under
stood that the law firm Of Thompson,
Milverton e Cathcarf will represent
the defehdanta.
Recites FIRMS History
Mr.. Kinney, IN the complaint Of the
suit filed yesterday, claims that on May
3, 1911, he and the respondents under
a verbal agreement entered into co.
partnership for the general practise of
law with Offices in the Stangenwald
Building, this city. Under this agree
ment, claims Mr.. Kinney, he was to
share forty per cent of the losses and
profits Of the firm, the other three part.
ners twenty per cent each, or the re-
naming sixty per cent. a.t e.,
4. In November, 1912, alleges Mr.. Kin.
ney, who was then absent from the Ter.
ritQry, be entered into preliminary me-
gotSations for determination of the
eOpartnership. The basis of the disco
luton was to be in accord with the
partnership agreement Without com
ing TO an agreement, Kinney claims in
his suit, his partners on December 5,
1912, arbitrarily filed in the Office of
the treasurer of the Territory a notice
of his withdrawal from the firm as of
the first Of that month, by mutual con
sent, ''the said respondents intending
thereby effectually to exclude petit
toner from participation in the profits
from all pending and future business of
said partnership, and TO appropriate TO
themselves the greater part Of the as
sets belonging to said partnership" rs.
Some Good Fees
Kinney claims that since the filing
of his purportcd withdrawal his part
ners have excluded him from any part
or share in the business of the copart-
nership and deprived him of his valu-
able equitable interest in il to his great
damage. While! certain small payments
have been made 70 him since December
., 1919, he has received from the firm
nothing TO speak Of Since that date,
claims Mr.. Kinney, his partners have
RETAINED large amounts from substan-
tial fees collected by them in which
petitioner had a large equitable inter
est without in any way accounting for
the samei and have even retained
either or the whole or q grossly undue
proportion of two substantial fees of
$4,000 and SIC, 900, respec lively, the first
of which was entirely earned, and the
second almost in entirety, prior to said
fifth day Of December, 1912. -
/. Paragraph six of the complaint re,
cites:
"ThRt from the formation of said
eopartnership, ON or about said third
day Of May, 1911, as aforesaid, the said
respondents have kept the copartner-
ship books Of account showing all trans
actions and accounts Of said copartner-
ship, intending all transactions subse-
quent TO said fifth day of December,
1879, end now have said books in tbeir
possession. That no settlement Of said
eopartnership accounts has ever been
made between petitioner and respond
ents and that, since the exclusion by re.
spondents of the petitioner from the
said copartnership business, and the
appropriation thereof, together with all
substantial assets, by said respondents
as aforesaid, the petitioner has repeat
eddy applied to said respondents 70
come to a final settlement with respect
thereto, And petitioner had well hoped
that said respondents would have com.
piled with petitioner, 3 reasonable re.
quest, as in justice and equity they
ought to have done, but said respond.
ents have refused and still refuse to
render a proper accounting to and set
Element with this petitioner
(. --------------s \ s------------