Shaw v. Kahala

3 Haw. 367
Hawaii Supreme Court·Decided January 15, 1872·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

DECISION ON BILL OE EXCEPTIONS.

It is considered by the Court here: First — That the Act of June 23d, 1868, limiting the time within which to bring suits against administrators, does not apply to administrators appointed previously to the enactment of that act. Second— That the statutes of limitations are interrupted by the death of the intestate until the appointment of an administrator. [368] Third — That the presentment of a claim to tbe Probate Court after its rejeetment by tbe administrator, is not tbe commencement - of a suit wbicb interrupts tbe statute of limitations. Fourth — That tbe statute of limitations in this case was not required to be specially pleaded.

W. C. Jones for plaintiff'. A. P. Judd for defendant. Honolulu, March 13th, 1872.

Tbe exceptions are accordingly sustained on tbe first and second grounds above named, and overruled on tbe third and fourth grounds. Tbe judgment of tbe Court below is vacated, and judgment is ordered for tbe plaintiff for tbe amount of the note and interest to be computed by tbe Clerk, and for twenty-five dollars for funeral expenses of tbe intestate, but not for tbe funeral expenses of bis widow.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Shaw v. Kahala, 3 Haw. 367 (haw 1872).

3 Haw. 367 (Shaw v. Kahala) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Mossman v. HAW'N TR. CO., LIMITED
361 P.2d 374 (Hawaii Supreme Court, 1961)
Defries v. Cartwright
10 Haw. 249 (Hawaii Supreme Court, 1896)