Davis v. King
16 Haw. 792
Opinion
(1) The instrument is set forth in the complaint and sued on in haec verba and it is immaterial what the plaintiff called it, whether it was in fact a promissory note or not. (2) The complaint was made a part of the summons by reference, and there is no statute requiring the return endorsed on a summons issued by a district court to refer to the complaint as distinguished from the summons. The judgment below is affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Davis v. King, 16 Haw. 792 (haw 1905).
16 Haw. 792 (Davis v. King) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Peterson v. Lau Tong
30 Haw. 191 (Hawaii Supreme Court, 1927)