Hawaii Holomua, Volume III, Number 105, 5 May 1894 Edition 02 — COMING LAWSUITS. [ARTICLE]

COMING LAWSUITS.

— Civil and Criminal Business B fore the Circ.iit Co-ort. — ! fop.eigx jrai—ckixixai~ Pnvision il G-nermneat vs. J . M Vivas nial J T*-iseira; U'ei ist. il«-jiree. F«*ster wttb pro--cnti >i! K:tnney for ilefenJ*ats. Prvi-'on»l Govf rnment vs. C Perrein»; eomoaon nn Hinee. Ap; ; .1 from Honololu Di>tr:<-t Coort. Fi>ster for Jef in«3 iots I ■ vis; ual (i >vernraeut vs, E N ; l;bel first de"ree. Kinne\ \>it!i pr'>secutiou; Cre;g'iton fv>r defeiul mt. Pr..v:sioo«l Government v>.; Wm. Patter.son; assult and batterv. Apneal frr.ni E v» district CoU;‘ W. 1*. C»stle f >r defen ' dant. ' 'r. Yi>;onal Gorcrnraent vs Wm L M >" n »n; embezzlement V. V. Asbfoni for »lefen 1 »nt. Pr n »1 G veam:i- nt vs T.?i<r " .*u'. n i :.wfn! p.>ss s.«m o? op uin. A; peal fiom Honolnln : Dl.str Ooart F*»ster f*)r <lej fen»lant. Pr v s> - i , (.! >ver:.'ae »t vs I >*j Tt- ig a.s>-i!t willi dmg r. -J s wee.p >n Aop-al fr > u H 'U >lnln District C i!t Prov;s'u*nal G>vern:nent vs. Sa n l u; 1,11 1 >vf• 11 |> 'St.">s : 1 • ipinin Appeai tro!i H-mobiI;i; District (' >; rt Provis onal G >vern m*".t vs Ah ; Wi g; nn iwli; |>-*ssi*ssi.>D o{ I opin.i,. Appe.il froni H molnlu | l.'istr!ct (,\)i:rt Foster f >r »le- ; fendaiit Prov sional Cr >venun nt vs | Cflun Ycm; asanlt with dai;geron.sj weapon. Magoou for dofeu 1 i:it.. Provis on-il G >ver:iment vs. j K u ni Wiiu; escape Pi .vis >:ia : (r >vernnj..' it vs. J M Pi ihi.n'; e;obezzlem :it. Provisii>aal Gjvernment vs. ; J,*S' ,»;i ('aee :eros; as i U w tīi deadlv weapon. M.igooa f *r defend u.t. Provision il G >vermneut vs. Ali | Chai; perjury, 2.i l d >groo. Provisi>m'il G >vermnent v.s Ali Poe; miliwfii! possession of opium Appeal from Honoluln Distnct C >urt. Petcrson fur defendant. Provisioml G ivorn nent vs. D. Penein; assnlt aiid batten ? . Appeal from Honolnla District C>)iirt. Klnney for defend int. Provis mal G )vermii Mit vs RC C1 »r!;, vi 1 iting 8oction 1, Act “21. P G. L :ws Apptal from j Honolulu District Conrt. Km'u | ulukon f >r defen lant. i Pr 'vision il G )vornruont vs Ah Pi: assnlt !ind batt?ry. Appeai froin Honolaln D strict Coart. V, | V. Asliford for defendnnt. Provis‘;onal Governraent vs. Wong C umg; unlawful possasi siou of opmin, A ipe.il frora Honoluln District Court Kaulu i kou f >r defeud.mt. Pr >visi n il G )vernment vs. J A M igo >n; as mlt and batterv Appe il fro n Honohilii D strict Conrt. Kinney for dcfendant. Provision>iI Govermnent vs A i Wai: embezzlement. Appeal from Honolulu l)istnct Court. i‘erry for defendant. Provisional Governnient vs. Ah On and An G>*h; aault «nd b ;ttely. Appeal Honololu District Court. Davi»lsou f >r defeudant. l’r visīonal Governraent vs Ah ! Chew; opimn s»d!ing. Appeal frora lloiuilulu D.strict Court. l’r visional Government vs Ai j On; uuIhw(ul pr.ssessiou opimn.! Appeal frora Houohalu Distr ct! ( o ;i t. Davidson f»r defendaut ! Provisional Governioeiit vs. • Chan W« Heong; opiuui st‘lling. > Appeal fro;a Hon<>Sahi D.strict Court. Davidson for defendant. Provision«l G >vernniont vs Hnl Ko g aiias Ah K >ng; perverting| justice. Aopeal fro n Honolnlu i).strict Court. F»sler f»r defea-. ; dant Proris‘onft! Gcvernnient vs. Ah| Hau ali >s L;*e Ho; nnlawful pos-s-ss;on of opiain Appeai fr»m H >1! 'lulu District Conrt. Foster ior defendant Provisional Governruent vs Loiig Johu; viol »ting 8ection ō. Act 31, Prov.S!onal G>>vernraent l.iwa. Appeul frora Moaolulu Distr ct Court. Prorisioud Gjvernment vs. Ah G.n aa 1 L k> Ca*y; u i awf il p >ssession >>f opi ue. Appaal froni Honolaln D stnct Coart. D»vidson for defeudants. Pr visional vs. Ang G un; .»roeny th.rd d “gre-?. Appe »l frora H >aoIaIa D.»:r ct Oonrt. Pror'.siunal Govern nenl vs Li ' Cheong and three others; assaalt aud U*ttuoy. Apponl Croai £wa

1 ? - -t=t ; D <trict Coart. Aohi fjr def.*a Hlinia. P ovi«ior.vI Gjv2mraeat vs. E Norrie; seditioos I«b©I. Aopeal I from Honoluln Dīstrict Goart. ■ Creigbtoa for defenJmt Provisī iD\l Goverument vs. Ah Sing; Qcl:««ful possession of ; j ■•piam. Appeal from Uonolola ' | District Coart. Provision\l Govemment vs. F. ' Smith; i\ssau!t anJ battery. Appeal from Honolula D:strict j Conrt. K\u!utou for defendant. Provi-«;nn i’ G ivornmeni vs. B, Gal! «g‘:«er; ra «yhe(n. Pruvi.-.!<>:. «1 G verua*eat vs. K u T un’... >fa! } s-e—ion ,{ opium. Ap:ea! frou\ Hono- ; iu’a Dist> ; t Cor.rt. D.;viJsoa ■ for defend «ut. J c<>b I,\ ' - vs J Mnl>.ish an«l C B «tchelor; C «rter <t Carter for p!aicl:ti; C. W. Ashford for dei fend-iut. Lonis.» RoJriguez \-s. D>minG<)mes; omeninl Carter «fc ’ Car*er f. >r pl «int rf. C. W. AshforJ ■ tor dsfendant L A »vs Tai Luug;issnmpsit ; C. W. Ashford f>>r pl.«iutitf; H >tcb for defen<lant S. A N W'.'il \s J M Horaer; . -1;.>n o« f. r■ gn judg uent N imiiin f r pb«iuti{f; C. W. .>i f- >rd for def n 1 «nt. Wiili.un A. Dyer vs. H >pYnne •’ ;i[ «;u ; i-s;iu,p-it. C. Drown i r ] lai!it if; C. 'A Asbford for f ir defend «nt. ■! L h, ii’j .;ie vs. 1ra A. D \\c:i; :\ssu':ipsit C «rter A C.«r- | fer f>»r plaīn fi. H «toh f>>r «lefeml u»t. i « .v.iii I. Jg ! vs. F. H. ReJwar i; >s- «•iipst. C.i t<*r »c Carter : , t »r |'1» int.fi’: (.’. W. Ash;orJ for l •Iefeu«lai:t l’. VY. R:i v!ius vs Honolulu ! S *ap W i'!\s (’ )ui. av; d.miages. O. Br>*\vn Kinuey for plaintiff; ; [ H irt >v: 1- i I itc i f >r >1 !.;>; 1 «nt. IMol. R Forster vs. H. M. HiW.'.u i; tr>-s;Mss on the case. j j Forst.>r pl.iintirf; N-Mimann b>r de- j l fendant. Tlioni:;s N >tt \- \ M I)o>ve!l et al.; i" i ii| >s t. \p -;«l fro u Hono- , i lu’in 1)> st et (. . t lv nney for ■u! i!•; .li’--:>ii;i.lilau.: \ V. Aslifuni for delond.«uls. Higas!ii v.s Pacific Sugar Mi!!; case Ne«ra inn-Foster for plaiu1 H «tob for defend iut. i J«li i J Freitas vs Joa > F. Sonza: breich of promise of m irri;»ge. Magoou f >r |>laintifF; C. W. Ash f.,r defendant. J. A. M igoon vs. Yee King Tong: ejectmeiit. ?d ig >on for n!aintifT; D.«vidsoa for defeudant. HAWAIIAN JCItV — eni.MINAL. Provisiou il G ivermient vs LillyM>lii; des«rting hnsband. . Appeal f. >ra W «ial i.i District |Co«rt. Kinnf*v f>r jiros *eation; |C. W. Ashford for defeud.\nt. Provision«l Government vs. Kamann (w); l;q ior selling with>mt a Iicens *. Appeal from Hnuolulu District Court. C. W. Asbford for defen«lant. Provisional Government vs. W. H. Carnmiags; assault and battery. Appeil from ilonolulu Distr!ct Conrt. Kaulnkou witii prosecutiou; Aehi for defeudant. Pnvisii>n il Governraent vs. E. ! A. Forbes; trvspass. A]>peai from Honoluln District Court. Jobnaon for «leieiul «ut Provisioual Goverumeat . vs. D.\vid Watson; vagrancy. Appeal frona Koolanpoko District Court. Provisional Governia?ut vs David W.«ts >n; !;nlawfnl? possession of opmm. Appeal fro:n Koo ; laupoko D.str'ct Court. Provosio«al Governraeut vs. Kanohokai; lavcouy, lst degree. Provis!onal Governraeut vs. Tho>nas Spancer; forgery. Provislonal G )V9rnmout vs. fuo:uas Speueer; forgery. Provisioiv«l Governmant vs. Keiii; an!awfal ])osses.4ion of I opium. Aopeal from liono'.nlu Distnot Coart; Kaulukoa for i iiefdu>l int, Prw!sional G ivern:nent vs Pua anui; iiq>i r selling withnnt lic<*nse. Appeal from Honolula District Court. Kiulialoe ilefen : Jant, Pr >v;sio:i «l G ivernment vs R. P.ilau; iiquor seliing witboat lieeu.se. A;»;>eal fr.nn Honolnlu D.strict Coart. Kiabafjr dcfeuj daut. Provisiooal G>vernm*ut vs. P.ihupa; viol t!ug Section 1. Aet 21, P G. L«ws. Apj>e il from Houola!a D.strict Court. Kaalia for defe:»dant. Provisiona! Goveram'nt vs. N.k«i;: viol.ting Saction 5, Act 21. P. G Li\vs A >;<eal frora H>> uoiulu i);strict Court. Kial.a for «!afeaJ »at. Pr-ivisional G)vemai}at vs. P. vi'>liting S.*etion 1. Act 21. P. G L«ws. Appeal fro n H »- nolala D.str«ct Court. Kiaiu for defbiid.*ut. Provisional Governraent vs. AuLaii laruaay, 3rd dagroe.