Case: Abigail K. Campbell Parker, Joseph O. Carter and Cecil Brown, Trustees under the Will and of the Estate of James Campbell, Deceased, v. Abigail K. Campbell Parker, Abigail W. Kawananakoa, Alice K. Macfarlane, Muriel K. Campbell, a Minor, Beatrice U. (Mary) Campbell, a Minor, Abigail Helen Kapiolani Kawananakoa, a Minor, and - Kawananakoa, a Minor
Abbreviation: Campbell Parker v. Campbell Parker
Court: Supreme Court of the Territory of Hawaii
Jurisdiction: Hawaii
Decision Date: 1906-11-23
Docket Number: No. 31
Citation: 18 Haw. 658
Volume: 18
Reporter: Hawaii Reports
Parties: Abigail K. Campbell Parker, Joseph O. Carter and Cecil Brown, Trustees under the Will and of the Estate of James Campbell, Deceased, v. Abigail K. Campbell Parker, Abigail W. Kawananakoa, Alice K. Macfarlane, Muriel K. Campbell, a Minor, Beatrice U. (Mary) Campbell, a Minor, Abigail Helen Kapiolani Kawananakoa, a Minor, and - Kawananakoa, a Minor.
Pages: 658–658

No. 31.
Abigail K. Campbell Parker, Joseph O. Carter and Cecil Brown, Trustees under the Will and of the Estate of James Campbell, Deceased, v. Abigail K. Campbell Parker, Abigail W. Kawananakoa, Alice K. Macfarlane, Muriel K. Campbell, a Minor, Beatrice U. (Mary) Campbell, a Minor, Abigail Helen Kapiolani Kawananakoa, a Minor, and - Kawananakoa, a Minor.
Petition for rehearing.
Filed November 14, 1906.
Decided November 23, 1906.
Frear, C.J., Hart-well and Wilder, JJ.
J. J. Dunne, C. F. Peterson and R. W. Breckons for petitioners.

This is a petition for rehearing by Abigail W. Kawananakoa, Alice 17. Macfarlane also requesting the same, of the decision which was reported in 18 Haw. 34, so far as it relates to the following question, namely: “Arc the widow and children entitled to any share of the net income provided in the ninth and tenth clauses of the will pending the closing of administration.” The grounds for rehearing are that the court overlooked and did not consider certain portions of the will and that the decision on the question is open to two constructions and is not clear. Per curiam. This matter was fully argued in the briefs, all the arguments were considered by the court, and no portion of the will was overlooked. The court decided and intended.to decide that the widow and children are not entitled at any time to any share of the net income referred to in the ninth and tenth clauses of the will pending the closing of administration. A reexamination of the matter strengthens that view. The petition for rehearing is denied without argument. Rule 5.