Davis v. King

16 Haw. 792
Hawaii Supreme Court·Decided March 8, 1905·No. No. 69·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Per curiam:

(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)